________________
27
fire is located, therefore there is no absence of occurrence in the fire.
According to Mathuranath the meaning of nondeviation is 'Sadhyābhāvādhikaraṇanirūpitavrittitvābhāva' (साध्याभावाधिकरणनिरूपितवृत्तित्वाभाव) the absence of occurrence indicated by the locus of absences of that which is to be established. Though this definition is based on ‘Vyadhikraṇabahuvrihi (gif) compound which is not considered correct to apply in every case, but there is no other way to maintain the reason as non-occurrent (avritti f) in the locus of the absence of sadhya without tripada vyadhikraṇa bahuvrīhi (त्रिपदव्यधिकरणबहुव्रीहि) compound.
Raghunath Siromani has stated the reason of rejection of this definition pointing out the fault of too narrow application (avyāpti ) in the inference sadhya of which has incomplete occurrence (avyāpyavritti f), therefore the second definition in the form of 'sadhyavadbhinnasādhyābhāvavadavrttitvam' (साध्यवद्भिन्नसाध्याभाववदवृत्तित्वम्) is introduced. In this inference 'this tree has the conjunction of monkey because of this-tree-ness', the first definition can't be applied because the reason viz. 'this-tree ness' occurred in this tree which has absence of conjunction of monkey in the root of this tree which is the substratum of the absence of sadhya. A monkey is conjoined with a branch of tree and not the root of tree, hence there is occurrence (vrittitva qft) indicated by the substratum (adhikaraṇa (3) of the absence of sadhya, so there is a fault of too narrow application.
Mathuranath has tried to remove this fault by modifying this definition. According to him 'the absence of occurrence of the reason indicated by the substratum which is the locus of that substratum-ness which is not delimited (avacchinna
