________________ 266 18) Cf. PS III. 8: sadhyadharmo yato hetus tadabhasas ca bhuyasa / tasmat tad vistarah purvam hetvadyarthat pradarsyate | Quoted in the Pramanavart tikalamkara p. 580. 15) Quoted in the Pramanavarttikalamkara p. 580; Hetubindutika p. 11, Dharmot tarapradipa p. 97 reads: samudayasya sadhyatvad dharmamatre ca... 16) As a matter of fact, Dharmakirti went back to the old terminology 'paksa dharma' when he first defined hetu in Pramanavarttika I. 1abi: paksadharmas tadamsena vyapto hetuh. In Nyayabindu II. 5, however, he defines the first characteristic as lirgasyanumeye sattvam eva (niscitam), which echoes the definition in PS II. 5cd. 17) "On Sapaksa", Journal of Indian Philosophy, vol. 18-1, 1990. See for example Hayes, op. cit., p. 113. 19) It is to be noted that Dharmakirti does not agree with Dignaga's definition of vipaksa. According to him, vipaksa | asapaksa is what is not sapaksa, which includes what is different from or incompatible with sapaksa as well as absence of sapaksa. See for example, Nyayabindu II. 11-12: na sapakso 'sa paksah || tato'nyas tadviruddhas tadabhavas ceti ll. 20) Prasastapada's formulae of the trairupya (anumeyena sambaddham, tadanvite prasiddham, tadabhave nasty eva) seems to support our interpretation of the logical subject of asati. For reference see my paper "On Trairupya Formu lae", p. 163. 21) Jinendrabuddhi's Tika (D94a): 'dir med pa'i sgras de dang mtshungs pa'i med pa brjod par bya ba 'ba' zhig ma yin gyi / 'on kyang de las gzhan pa dang de dang 'gal ba yang ste de'i rnam pas dben pa'i phyir ro zhes rig par bya'o || 22) I have discussed the matter in my paper presented at the XIIth IABS con ference in Lausanne in August 1999. 23) See Hetubindu (ed. by Ernst Steinkellner, Wien 1967, Teil I) p. 34. One final remark on Oetke's book (p. 52): He seems to have some difficulty in identifying the two Chinese expressions which appear in N Mukh (Taisho p. 2c), namely, and they correspond to paryudasa and prasaj yapratisedha, which can be proven from the parallel passage in PS-Vitti IV.3. This fact has been pointed out by Yasunori Ejima, Chugan Shiso no Tenkai-Bhavaviveka Kenkyu--, Tokyo 1980, p. 117. 24) I would like to thank Prof. Jonathan Silk for correcting my English and giving me several important suggestions. (WE WAKIU**)
