________________
252
linge lingi bhavaty eva linginy evetarat punaḥ /
niyamasya viparyase 'sambandho lingalinginoh
"The marked (lingin) necessarily (eva) occurs where the inferential mark (linga) occurs, and the latter (i.e. the mark) occurs only (eva) where the marked occurs. If the restriction (niyama) [by the particle eva] is reversed, there is no [proper] relation (sambandha) between the mark and the marked."
In the above verse the term lingin is followed by the particle eva in relation to the term linga; therefore, the domain of the marked is restricted (niyata) by that of the mark. Such a relation is regarded by Dignāga as the proper relation (sambandha) between the mark and the marked. Although he does not mention the term vyapti as an equivalent of sambandha in this context (he refers to it in PS-Vṛtti IV. 4), I understand that PS II. 21 is the first attempt to define the relation of 'pervasion' in the history of Indian It may be supported by the fact that Dharmakirti phrases his definition of pervasion, following the model presented in PS II. 21.
vyāptir vyāpakasya tatra bhava eva vyapyasya va tatraiva bhavaḥ | (Pramāṇavārttika-Svavṛtti, ed. by R. Gnoli, Serie Orientale Roma 23, Rome 1960, p. 2)
"Pervasion is the pervader (vyāpaka)'s necessary (eva) presence in the domain [where the pervaded (vyapya) occurs] or the pervaded's presence only (eva) in the domain [where the pervader occurs]."
As I demonstrated in detail in my article "Indo Ronrigaku niokeru Henjugainen no Seisei to Hatten" (The Origin and Development of the Concept of vyapti in Indian Logic, Hiroshima Daigaku Bungakubu Kiyo, Vol. 46, Special Issue No. 1, 1986), it was Dignaga who first introduced the concept of vyāpti as the foundation of a valid inference. He was well acquainted with the Indian Grammartical tradition and applied their concept of niyama as the forerunning model of the logical concept vyapti.
