________________
INFERENCE.
685
the Ear, etc. being the Corroborative Instance per dissimilarity.- Tasya' of the Colour.
In all these three Reasons, there being no Corroborative Instances per Similarity, they have only two features.
(4) [Another example)-The Soul, the Jar and other things are somehow essentially non-existent, because they are somehow not-apprehended,like the Hare's Horn '.-In this case, there is no Corroborative Instance per dissimilarity; as the Jar and other things' inchide 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 forward as the Instance; and apart from the 'Positive and the Negative, there is no third category, wherein it could be pointed out that the exclusion of the Probandum implies the exclusion of the Probans.
(5) [Another example) Things like the Hare's Horn are somehow essentially existent, as they are somehow apprehensible; the absence of the Instance per dissimilarity here also may be explained as above.
(6) [Another example) - This house is understood as having your father within-because your Father's voice is heard'.—Here also there is no Instance per Similarity; hence the Probans is only 'two-featured'.
(1) In the case of Words, Lamps and such things, it is found that, even though they do not subsist in the Subject (Minor Term), yet they indicate (make known) things, in the same way as the Inferential Probans in the shape of Smoke, eta. Words and Lamps are not properties subsisting in the Jar and such things indicated by them; and yet the Thing is actually apprehended through them; hence in this case the two conditions are present that of 'absence where the Probandum is known to be absent, and being otherwise impossible'; hence the Probans here is a two-featured one. (1872-1379)
The following Text supplies the answer to the above arguments of Patrastiimin -
TEXT (1380)
IS THE PROPOSED DEFINITION MEANT TO BE GENERAL! OR, IN REFEBENCE TO A particular SUBJECT ON WHICH KNOWLEDGE IS SOUGHT?
OR IN REFERENCE TO THE Instance !-(1380)
COMMENTARY.
The proposed definition of the Probans is that it is otherwise impossible', which means that) it should not exist apart from the Probandum ;
(1) now is this meant to be general (applicable to all Probans)? Or is it meant to be applicable to any particular object ? and in the latter case, (2) is it meant to be in reference to a particular object in which the existence or otherwise of the Probandum is sought to be known? Or (3) in reference
