Given below are two statements
Statement I: Classical Indian logicians (Naiyāyikas) define Upamāna (Comparison) as the cognition of the new object through similarity, known by another means of cognition.
Statement II: Naiyāyikas consider upamāna as a type of inductive reasoning and therefore view it as a type of inference (anumāna) only.
In light of the above statements, choose the most appropriate answer from the options given below

Correct option is C

· Statement I is correct: According to the Naiyāyikas (Classical Indian logicians), Upamāna (Comparison) is indeed defined as a means of valid knowledge (pramāṇa) through which one recognizes the relationship of similarity between a known and an unknown object. This knowledge is typically derived through another means of cognition, such as perception. For instance, if a person has been told that a wild animal called a gavaya (a type of wild ox) is similar to a cow, and upon seeing a gavaya for the first time, they identify it based on this similarity, that cognition is considered Upamāna.
· Statement II is incorrect: Upamāna is recognized by the Naiyāyikas as a distinct means of knowledge (pramāṇa), separate from Anumāna (Inference). While Upamāna involves recognizing similarity to identify an unknown object, Anumāna refers to drawing a conclusion based on logical reasoning and premises. Therefore, Naiyāyikas do not classify Upamāna as a type of inference or inductive reasoning.
Information Booster 1. Pramāṇas in Indian Logic: Classical Indian logic recognizes the following primary means of valid knowledge (pramāṇas):
· Pratyakṣa (Perception): Direct sensory experience.
· Anumāna (Inference): Logical deduction based on premises.
· Upamāna (Comparison): Knowledge gained through recognizing similarity.
· Śabda (Testimony): Knowledge through authoritative verbal statements.
2. Example of Upamāna:
· A person is told that a gavaya resembles a cow. Upon seeing a gavaya in the forest and recognizing its similarity to a cow, the person understands, "This is a gavaya." This process is an example of knowledge gained through Upamāna.
3. Difference Between Upamāna and Anumāna:
· Upamāna: Based on recognizing similarity between objects.
· Anumāna: Based on drawing conclusions from evidence and logical premises (e.g., seeing smoke and inferring fire).