________________
प्रथमं लक्षणम्
___ (२०) न च तथापि कपिसंयोगी१९ एतद्वक्षत्वादित्याद्यव्याप्यवृत्तिसाध्यकसद्धेतौ अव्याप्तिरिति वाच्यम् । निरुक्तसाध्याऽभावत्वविशिष्टनिरूपिता या निरुक्तसम्बन्धसंसर्गकनिरवच्छिन्नाधिकरणता तदाश्रयावृत्तित्वस्य विवक्षितत्वात् । गुणकर्मान्यत्वविशिष्टसत्त्वाऽभाववान्
that which is to be established alone exists there.
(20) Even though it should not be argued that-there is a fault of too narrow application in the inference; 'this has the conjunction of monkey19 because of this tree-ness' where that which is to be established has partial existence, this is because the non-existence in that which has the substratum-ness which is not determined by any characteristic, having determined by mentioned relation and which is described by that which is qualified by the mentioned state of being the absence of that which is to be established, is desired to be said. Therefore there is no fault of too narrow application in the inference “this has the absence of existence qualified by the difference from quality and action because of quality-ness,” even though the substratum-ness of the absence of that which is to be
19. after it (Kapi-samyogi) Having conjunction of monkey. In that tree
which is locus of the absence of conjunction of monkey limited by root, there that tree-ness exists, therefore there is fault of too narrow application. When occurrence in the locus of the substratum-ness which is not determined by any characteristic is maintained, there would not be fault of too narrow application, because in this case the locus of the substratumness which is not determined by anything will be quality etc. where that treeness does not exist.
