________________
536
Appendix to Volume I experience all cases of absence of fire as being also the cases of the absence of smoke. Thus since without such a joint method of agreement in presence and absence the universal invariable concomitance cannot be determined, and since it is not possible to assure oneself of the universal agreement in presence or in absence, the concomitance itself cannot be determined".
Purandara, however, a follower of Cārvāka (probably of the seventh century), admits the usefulness of inference in determining the nature of all worldly things where perceptual experience is available; but inference cannot be employed for establishing any dogma regarding the transcendental world, or life after death or the laws of Karma which cannot be available to ordinary perceptual experience. The main reason for upholding such a distinction between the validity of inference in our practical life of ordinary experience, and in ascertaining transcending truths beyond experience, lies in this, that an inductive generalization is made by observing a large number of cases of agreement in presence together with agreement in absence, and no cases of agreement in presence can be observed in the transcendent sphere; for even if such spheres existed they could not be perceived by the senses. Thus, since in the supposed supra-sensuous transcendent world no case of a hetu agreeing with the presence of its sādhya can be observed, no inductive generalization or law of concomitance can be made relating to this sphere? In reply to this contention Vādideva says that such a change may be valid against the Mīmāmsists who depend upon the joint method of agreement and difference for making any inductive generalization, but this cannot
niyamaś cā'numānā-rigam grhitaḥ pratipadyate grahanam ca'sya na'nyatra nāstită-niscayam vină darśanā-darsanābhyam hi niyama-grahanam jadi tad apy asad anagnau hi dhūmasy'e'stam adarśanam anagniś ca kiyūn sarvam jagaj -j valana-tarjitam tatra dhūmasya năstittam nai'va pasyant y ayoginah.
Nyāya-manjari, p. 120. 2 He is mentioned in Kamalasila's Pañjikā, p. 431, Purandaras tv āla lokaprasiddham anumānam cārvākair api'syate era, yat tu kaiś cit laukikam mārgam atikramya anumānam ucyate tan nişidhyate. Vădideva Sūri also quotes a sūtra of Purandara in his commentary Syādi āda-ratnokūraon his Pramāņa-naya-tattralokā-lankāra, Il. 131: pramāṇasya gaunatvād anumānūd artha-niscaya-durlabhāt.
azyabhicārā-vagamo hi laukika-hetünām anumeyā'vagame nimitiam sa năsti tantra-siddhesu iti na tebhyah parokşā-rthă'vagamo nyāyyo'ta idam uktam anumanād artha-niscayo durlabhah.
