cover image: The Calcutta Review  February 1953



The Calcutta Review February 1953


The replof the Mimansakas to this question is that the method of agreement contributes much to arrive at the required induction that smoke is the invariable concomitant of fire but exclusive use of the method of difference to arrive at the said induction is not worth trying. [...] If the sentence ' he eats at night ' is the probandum and Devadatta who is flabby but does not take his meal during the day is the probans then the probans in question does not belong to the subject of inferenCe (the speaker of the sentence) but belongs to such a locus as contains the negation of the probandum and hence is not an invariable mark. [...] The injunction 'one who is desirous of the lusture arising from the holy study should offer Caru (rice boiled in milk) in honour of the sungod' is also incomplete since the meaning of the word 'cant' is ambiguous. [...] If they hold that the force of a cause is an effect of the cause itself then is -it an effect of the cause alone or of the cause combined with the conditions? [...] If this is the contention of the Mimansakas then they should admit that the intermediate process is perceptible but not transcendental since they do not infer the intermediate process of a cause from its effect but directly know the operation of the cause in and through the intermediate process before the appearance of its effect.
Published in
SARF Document ID
Segment Pages Author Actions
i-ii unknown view
83-99 Janaki Bhattacharyya view
Are We Facing an Economic Depression?
100-112 S.R. Bose view
The Day of Buddha’s Enlightenment
113-116 S.C. Chatterjee view
Round the World
117-120 unknown view
Reviews and Notices of Books
121-124 unknown view
125-127 unknown view
Official Notifications
128-138 unknown view
Convocation Address (I)
139-190 Sambhunath Banerjee view
Convocation Address II
191-195 H.C. Mookerjee view
Convocation Address III
196-204 Rajendra Prasad view
1-3 unknown view

Related Topics