________________
द्वितीयं लक्षणम्
9
on
तथा च साध्यवद्भिन्नस्य वृत्तावनन्वयात् यथा सन्निवेशे न वैयर्थ्यम् । साध्याभावे५३ साध्यवद्भिन्नवृत्तित्वविशेषणं तु अव्याप्यवृत्तिसाध्यकसङ्ग्रहार्थम् एव इत्याशयः ।
(जा.४) साध्यवद्भिन्नवृत्तिद्रव्यत्वादिमति पर्वतादौ धूमादेः
which has that which is to be established. Therefore there is no fault of useless-ness when it is included as it is, because that which is different from that which has that which is to be established is not semantically related with existence, The existence in that which is different from that which has that which is to be esablished is the qualifier of the absence of that which is to be established. 53 This qualification for the inclusion of the inference where that which is to be established is partially existent, this is the idea.
(J.4) There would be a fault of too narrow application or the fault of impossibility, because smoke exists in mountain etc., which is the substratum of substanceness, which exists in
53. HZ410-Absence of occurence (of reason) which is indicated by the
locus of the absence of sādhya and which (locus) is different from that which has sādhya. This is second definition. When this definition is accepted, there is no fault of too narrow application in the inference; 'this has the conjunction of monkey because of this tree-ness.' Though this tree is locus of absence of the conjunction of monkey in the root but this is not different from that which is locus of sādhya, because the conjunction of monkey also exists there such a locus of absence of sādhya is quality also where this tree-ness does not occurs. This is the idea.
