________________
Dignaga on trairupya Reconsidered: A Reply to Prof. Oetke
stratum of the property to be proven in the first characteristic and just the property to be proven in the third characteristic. Now, in order to identify the logical subject of the third characteristic, we must have a clear idea about two more technical terms, namely, sapakṣa and vipakṣa, for I understand that they correspond to tattulya and asat in the second and the third characteristics of trairûpya.
257
2.3.2. sapaksa and vipakşa
Dignaga first defined sapaksa and vipaksa in NMukh (Taisho 1c-2a) as fol
lows:
此中,若品與立法隣近均等說名同品。以一切義皆名品故。
若所立無說名異品。非與同品相違或異。
"In this connection, if an object (paksa) () is close (samipa?) or similar to (samana) the property to be proven (sādhyadharma), it is called 'sapakṣa' (F), for any object (artha) () can be called 'pakṣa'. If [an object] lacks [the property] to be proven, it is called 'vipakṣa' ()The latter is neither incompatible (viruddha) (F) with nor different. (anya) () from sapakṣa...."
In PS III Dignaga gives somewhat different definitions of the two terms:
PS-Vṛtti [Kanakavarman] 130a: de la don thams cad phyogs su byas pas nye ba'i phyir bsgrub par bya ba'i chos kyi spyis mthun pa'i phyogs so || (Cf.. Nyayabindu II. 9-Nyayapravesa §2.2: sadhyadharmasāmānyena samano 'rthah sapakṣaḥ)
"In this connection, since any object (don=artha) can be called 'paksa', [an object is called] 'sapakṣa' (similar to pakṣa) in respect of the universal similarity (samanya) which is the property to be proven, for [it is] close to [pakṣa]."
PS [Kanakavarman] III. 19-20a: de las gahan dang de 'gal ba | gnyis po yang mi mthun phyogs ma yin | gtan tshigs med dang 'gal ba las || rnam
