________________
१४
व्याप्तिपञ्चकम्
भावो बोध्यः । तेन धूमवान् वर्तरित्यादौ धूमाभाववज्जलहृदादिवृत्त्यभावस्य धूमाभाववद्वृत्तित्वजलत्वोभयत्वावच्छिन्नाभावस्य च वह्नौ सत्त्वेऽपि न
should be known as the absence of such existence, in general, therefore there is no fault of too wide application in the inference 'this has smoke because of fire' though the absence of existence of reason in waterlake etc. which have the absence of that which is to be established, and the absence which is determined by the state of being both waster-ness and existence indicated by that which has the absence of smoke that which is to be established, abides in the fire. And existent, indicated by that which has the absence of that which is to be established, should be mentioned by the relation which determines the state
locus of the absence of sādhya we understand the absence as both that occurrence and waterhood, that absence of both also exists in the reason fire. Though the occurrence which is indicated by the locus hot-iron-ball is subsist in fire but waterhood does not subsist in fire. Therefore there is absence of both that occurrence and waterhood, hence there is fault of over-extension, with regards to the inference, 'it has smoke because of fire. Therefore the absence of occurrence in general is understood by the words the absence of occurrence, so there would not be over-extension with regards to the inherence “it has smoke because of fire,' by the word absence of occurrence in general. The absence of occurrence indicated by hotiron ball also understood, and that occurrence exists in fire, so there is not the absence of occurrence in the fire, hence there would not be over-extension.
