Is There Anything Like Indian Logic? Anumana, 'Inference' and Inference in the Critique of Jayarasi Bhatta

The paper presents an analysis of the anumana chapter of Jayarasi's Tattvopaplava-simha and the nature of his criticism levelled against the anumana model. The results of the analysis force us to revise our understanding of Jayarasi Bhatta as a sceptic. Instead, he emerges as a highly critical (materialist) philosopher. In addition, the nature of Jayarasi's criticism of the anumana model allow us to conclude that anumana should not be equated with inference, but rather is its limited subset, and may at best be rendered as 'disputational inference', 'debational inference' or even 'dialogical inference'. Jayarasi applies a range of logical laws which clearly represent patterns of what can be classified as a priori reasoning (if we grant that there could be a priori justification for our knowledge at all) and analytical justifications for knowledge, which were traditionally not reckoned sound. Against the backdrop of Jayarasi's criticism of anumana, the paper also attempts to provide an explanation to why Indian philosophy and logic did not develop any concept of proper symbols and variables.