Encyclopedia of India–China Cultural Contacts v1.c7.s7.t2.68

v1.c7.s7.t2.68

The most important difference between new and old *Hetuvidya* lies with their analysis of “hetu”, since whether a “hetu” is correct or not directly relates to the success of the inference. Old Hetuvidya made much exploration in respect of “hetu”, for instance, it proposed “fallacious cause”, but, it failed to show what hetu is correct and to discuss it in a clear and detailed manner. In this respect, new Hetuvidya made much improvement or reformation, and many of its theories of “hetu” were contained in “trairupya”. The term “trairupya” had been mentioned in old *Hetuvidya*, for example, volume I of *Mula-madhyamaka-karika* but without a clear explanation. It is neo-Hetuvidya thinkers that discussed “trairupya” in a complete and clear manner.