________________
Notes
135
ness is not believed by the one who advances it, even though the opponent may hold it to be correct.
P. 18. L. 21-22. The definition of the contradictory is the same as that given by the Naiyāyikas (Tarkasangraha, p. 45). Even the illustration of this fallacy is the same as given by the Naiyāyikas.
Ratnākarāvatārikā on Pramānanayatattvalokālankāra (6. 53., gives eight sub-varieties of the contradictory cause. The first of these is that which pervades the subject as well as the heterologue. The second pervades the subject as well as a part of the heterologue. The third resides in a part of the subject and part of the heterologue. The fourth resides in a part of the subject and pervades the heterologues. These very four fallacies are duplicated when we apply them with reference to those inferences where homologues are not available.
P. 18. L.23-28. The Naiyāyikas define inconclusive cause as one that co-exists partially. (Tarkasangraha, p. 44). They speak of its three varieties, over-wide (sādhāraņa), peculiar (asādhārana) and non-exclusive (anupasamhärin). That which coexists both with the probandum and its negation is the overwide type of inconclusive cause. It is similar to the firstvariety of our text. That which exists neither in the homologue nor in the heterologue is the peculiar. That which has neither a homologous illustration nor a heterologous illustration is the non-exclusive.
Ratnākarävatārikä on Pramānanayatattvalokālankāra (6. 57) gives eight sub-varieties of that type whose existence in the heterologous is doubtful. These varieties consist of probanes (1) pervading the subject, the homologous, and the heterologous, (2) pervading the subject and existing in a part of the homologous and the heterologous, (3) pervading the subject and the homologous and existing in a part of the heterologous, (4) pervading the subject and the heterologous and existing in a part of homologous (5) existing in a part of the subject, a part of the homologous and a part of the heterologous, (6) existing in a part of the subject and a part of homologous and pervading the heterologous, (7) existing in a part of the subject and a part of the heterologous and pervading the homologous, and (8) pervading the homologous and heterologous
