________________
( 160 )
2. (a) the pain of mine has been caused by the falling
insect ( paksa ). (b) because its appearance was felt on the touch of the
falling insect. (hetu ). 3. (a) the soul, jar and other things are somehow essenti
ally non-existent ( pratijña ). (b) because they are somehow inpprehensible in any way,
like the horns of the hare ( hetu ). In the last case, there is no Corroborative Instance of diss!milarity. The jar and other things include the entire group of Positive Entities and they have been mentioned in the Proposition as essentially non-existent. And the negative entity has been put forth as the Instance. Apart from the Positive and the Negative, there is no third category wherein it could be pointed out that the exclusion of the Probandun implies the exclusion of the Probans. Therefore, according to Patrasvāmin, there are ouly two organs of hetu, wherein other organs can casily be merged. This is the shortest and most well-defined way of making inference.
As a matter of fact, the Janias are of the view that the number of steps in a proposition cannot be fixed as it depends entirely on the level of competence of the hearer.101 Manikyanandi recognizes pratijri and hetu as the minimum essential steps, but he concedes that other steps may also be required in dealing with certain types of hearers, 102 Hemacandra198 is also of the same view. Vădideva's view, however, is somewhat different. He accepts, like the Buddists, one step for the particular type of hearers and two, three, four, and five for other general hearers.104 But Pätrasvāmin's view is more important in this respect as he does not go beyond the two steps of Pratijña and Hetu.
Santaraksita, following in the foot-steps of Dharmakirti criticises the theory of Patrasvāmin. He says that being spoken of as the moon is present also in thihgs where the Probandum ( sa paksa ) is known to be present. It is also
