A viruddha hetu is one whose accepted vyāpti actually leads to a conclusion contrary to what the reasoner wants to prove. Instead of supporting the intended sādhya, the middle term supports its negation. This makes the inference self defeating, because if the hetu is accepted, the conclusion must be the opposite of the stated thesis. Such a reason is deeply defective, as it undermines the very claim it is meant to justify.
Option A:
Option A characterises an asiddha hetu, where the middle term is not established in the pakṣa; this is a different kind of fallacy.
Option B:
Option B mentions over narrowness but does not capture the central feature of viruddha, namely reversing the intended conclusion.
Option C:
Option C correctly identifies that a viruddha hetu proves the contrary of the thesis on the basis of its own vyāpti, making the argument logically self destructive.
Option D:
Option D focuses only on the source of evidence; dependence on scripture is not, by itself, what defines viruddha in technical classifications of hetvābhāsa.
Comment Your Answer
Please login to comment your answer.
Sign In
Sign Up