Role Of Drstanta Indignagas Logic

Author(s): Shoryu Katsura
Publisher: Shoryu Katsura

Page 22

means of implication.” Dignāga is still holding his position that the two examples are necessary, though they are not necessarily explicitly stated; either one of them can imply the other or both.
So far Dignāga insisted on the necessity of a similar example beside a dissimilar example; now he argues for the necessity of a dissimilar example. An opponent points out: if 'pervasion' (vyāpti) is expressed in the form of a reason's being followed by a property to be proved (hetoḥ sādhyānugamaḥ), then it is not necessary to state its absence in the absence of a property to be proved (sādhyābhāve năstitā); hence there is no necessity to formulate a dissimilar example. Please note very well that Dignāga uses the word 'pervasion' for the first time in a technical sense in this particular portion of PSV.36
The opponent further remarks that it may be meaningful to formulate a dissimilar example, provided that a mere existence of a reason in a set of similar instances (sapakşe hetoḥ sadbhāvamātram) is intended by Dignāga in the formulation of a similar example; in that case, however, it is meaning less to refer to an external object as an actual example; consequently, 'pervasion' shoulde be expressed in a similar example. 37
35 PSV[K] 149a7-b1: gal te nyes pa 'di med de dper na mi rtag pa nyid ni rtsol ba las byung ba'o zhes bya ba 'dir shugs kyis bsgrub byami> rtag pa la sgrub pa rnyed pa nyid yin pa de Itar rtag pa nyid ni mnyan par bya'o zhes rtag pa la mnyan par bya ba nyid bstan par ni nus pa ma yin no zhe na /gal te shugs kyis gnyi ga rnyed pa yin na de kho bo cag mngon par 'dod pa nyid yin te shugs kyis sam gang yang rung bas gnyi ga rab tu bstan pa'i phyir ro // (naisa dosah / yathānityam eva prayatnānantariyakam ity atra arthāpattyā sādhye 'nitye sādhanam labdham bhavati, evam nityam eva śrāvanam iti nitye śrāvanatvam darśayitum na śakyata iti cet /yadi tarhy arthāpattyobhayam labdham tad asmābhir anujñātam eva, arthāpattya vā anyatarenobhayapradarśanāt /)) The last phrase corresponds to NMukh (Katsura 19xx: ) #
-WEAR, which is quoted in Pramānavārttika-Svavrtti (ed. by Gnoli, Rome, 19xx): 18. No corresponding PS[V]; Cf. Kitagawa (19...).
36 PSV[K] 149b1-2: gal te gtan tshigs bsgrub bya'i rjes su 'gro ba khyab pa rab tu bstan par bya ba yin na / de ni mi rtag pa las gzhan la med pa'i phyir bsgrub bya med na med do zhes brjod par mi bya ba dang / (yadi tu heto ḥ sādhyānugama vyāptiḥ darşitāḥ, tasyānityād anyatrābhāvāt, sadhyābhave ca nāstiteti na vaktavyam) Cf. PSV[V] D60b5-6: Kitagawa (19...).
37 PSV[K] 149b2-4:ci ste yod pa tsam yin na rtsol ba las byung ba nyid kyang med na bum pa'i <mi> rtag pa nyid kyang med pa'i phyir phyi rol gyi don la blots pa 'di ni dpe yin no // zhes brjod par mi bya'o zhes bya ba'i nyes pa 'di ni yod do (zhe na)* / khyab pa nyid kyi gtang tshigs ni bsgrub bya'i rjes su gro bar brjod par byaste / (atha sadbhāvamātram, prayatnānarariyakatvenāpi ghate nityatvasyāpy avinābhāvitvāt, bāhyārthāpeksam idam nidarśanam iti na vaktavyam ity asty esa dosa iti / vyāptir eva hetoḥ sādhyānugamena vaktavyā 1 * zhe na should be deleted by following PST. Cf. PSV[V] D60b6; Kitagawa (19...).
Dignāga on Example - 22