________________
INFERENCE.
697
also serve as the Instance per dissimilarity; because in that character, the Probans-being unapprehended will have ceased to exist.
Similarly in the case of the argument regarding things being somehow existent, the defect of 'futility' would be present.
Nirātmasu '-i.e. in non-entities.
Concomitance of the contrary character;- .e. the contrary character, -in the shape of the cessation of the Probandum-would be pervaded by (concomitant with) the absence of the Probans.
In that uy-i.e. by the possibility of the Instance per dissimilarity.(1404-1405)
The following Terts point out the defects in the argument propounded (by Patrasvämin), in Text 1377, regarding " Your father being present in the house, etc. etc." :
TEXTS (1406-1407).
WHEN THE PRESENCE OF THE FATHER IN THE HOUSE IS SOUGHT TO BE
PROVED BY THE HEARING OF THE FATHER'S VOICE, THE PROBANS IN THIS CASE 19 CLEARLY THEBE-FEATURED '. As, SURELY, AT SOME TIME PREVIOUSLY THE CONCOMITANCE OF THE VOICE HAS BEEN PERCEIVED: IF IT HAS NEVER BEEN SO PERCEIVED, THEN THE * INADMISSIBILITY OF THE PROBANS WOULD BE IRRESISTIBLE.
(1406-1407)
COMMENTARY
Tasya--the voice as belonging to the Father must certainly have been heard before. If it had not, then the Probank would be inadmissible.(1406-1407)
The said three-featured character of the Probans is shown in the following:
