Mmgl Annexure Ii (29-2) 8. Nine Imitations Poem by Rajaram Ramachandran

(a) The perception fault
These imitations are considered false. In these, the perception fault will say against the known and seen vision. ‘The ear will not feel the sound"—it says what is opposite, like this.

(b) Inference fault
The inference fault is one, when it can be considered boldly within opinion limit, but to say against it, like pot has ‘permanent nature' while it of ‘impermanent nature.'

(c) Self contradictory fault
This is the one that contradicts the fact what is said, like saying "My mother who gave birth to me is a barren woman.' When he is the born son, how can he say she is a barren woman?
(d) Worldly fault
‘Worldly fault' is one to speak against the statement of the world people. It is just like saying at the moon, "This is not moon."

(e) Scriptural fault
This is to say against scriptural quotations. The impermanent one is the religious man. It is said according to his scripture. If he says permanent what is said in the scriptures as impermanent, it becomes a scriptural fault.

(f) Infamous attribute
Infamous attributes are those statements which are not known to the opposite religious men. If a Buddha devotee tells a Sangyam devotee, "Sound is impermanent, " against the principle of Sangyam devotee who holds, "That is permanent, " So a bold statement of infamous attribute it becomes famous, thus making it a Infamous attribute.

(g) Infamous importance
Infamous importance is that the enemy should not know what is known to one. If Sangyam devotee tells his opposite Buddha devotee, "Soul is an intelligent thing, ' it does not suit Buddha devotee who believes, "There is nothing like Soul." So this becomes an infamous importance.

(h) Infamous contribution
Infamous contribution is that statement which cannot be understood by others without proper explanation. If other religious man tells the Buddhist devotee, "The cause for the pleasure-like material things is the Soul, " it will negate the principle of Buddha devotee to whom pleasure and soul are not acceptable. Since he cannot feel that it becomes infamous contribution.

(g) Infamous relationship
Infamous relationship is to say a thing to an enemy which is favorable to him. When one says, "Sound has got impermanent nature" to a Buddha devotee, to whom this statement suits, as it agrees with his principle. So it becomes an infamous relationship to the teller as he has nothing to prove on the contrary from his side.

9. Three reason faults
About the reason faults, there are three types of faults, which will divide themselves further as fallacy, Anaikanthigam, fault.

(a) Fallacies - Four
There are four kind of fallacies—contributory fallacy, unaccepted hypothesis fallacy, doubtful fallacy, teacher's fallacy.

(a-1) Contributory fallacy
Contributory fallacy is one which is not favorable both to the Vadhi and Pradhivadhi (Plaintiff and defendant) . It is like saying, "The sound is of impermanent nature, because of seeing with eyes."

(a-2) Unacceptable hypothesis fallacy
A reason that is given in between two opposing persons is called unacceptable hypothesis fallacy. It goes away as non-existent. "In the action sound it has a shape and so it is impermanent." Sangyam who said it "In action there is a shape" will appear as there is sound in the action. This is a useless reason and hence it has become faulty.

(a-3) Doubtful fallacy
With the doubtful reason one is trying to prove a thing. With a doubt of "Smoke or Snowfall" one is trying to prove boldly, "It is smoke and so there should be fire."

(a-4) Teacher's fallacy
To prove to an opponent, showing him a suitable impermanent thing, and telling him like "Space has the nature of sound and hence it is a thing." For this, counter argument will be "Space is not a thing" for the opponent to say. The statement is faulty.

(b) Anaikaanthigam - six
This is divided into six sections—Ordinary, Not ordinary, concomitant place turned as opposing one, opposing place turned as concomitant one, Contributory place fault, faulty adulteress.

(b-1) Ordinary
"Having announced the sound is impermanent nature"—this is an ordinary statement supporting both concomitant and opposing sides. "Having announced" is common for both permanent and impermanent. "Whether it has impermanent nature like pot or permanent nature like space? "—if the opponent is asked, no suitable reply is given. So, whatever said has not been proved and it became false.

(b-2) Not ordinary
The reason to prove the side talk, when it does not suit both concomitant and opposition, but still argue to prove like, "Sound is permanent nature having heard it" if one says this, "Having heard" has become a doubtful reason and is faulty under Anaikaanthikam.

(b-3) Existent at one side expanded to non-existent side to spread over Keep the existent at one side and find another side for the non-existent. For instance, after the statement ‘Sound will not appear at working place, ' to say the reason ‘because of its impermanency' it means that the reason of impermanency is not appearing in the workplace and that the existent goes with the lightning and not with the sky. The existent goes with the non-permanent pot, ‘Like pot it got destroyed and in that destruction will it appear? Like lightning got destroyed will not appear in that action? Like these doubts take place.