________________
३८
व्याप्तिपञ्चकम्
प्रतियोगकान्तमाधेयताविशेषणमनुपादेयमेव । तदुपादाने हेतुतावच्छेदकभेदेन कार्यकारणभावभेदापत्तेः । हेतुतावच्छेदकसम्बन्धेन सम्बन्धित्वे सति२७ इत्यनेनापि विशेषणाद् वह्निमान् गगनादित्यादौ नातिव्याप्तिः ।
(२६) ननु तथापि उभयत्वमुभयत्रैव पर्याप्तं न तु एकत्रेति सिद्धान्तादरे घटत्ववान् घटत्वतदभाववदुभयत्वादित्यादौ पर्याप्त्याख्य
the qualifier of occupancy (ādheyatā) ending with 'having counter-positive' should not be used indeed. If it is used there would be different cause-effect relationships due to different determinants of the state of being reason. The qualification 'state of being relatum by the relation which determines the state of being reason27 also should be used, therefore there is no fault of too wide application in the inference; 'this has fire because of ether'.
(26) Even though here the objection is-if this doctrine that 'both-ness occupies both things simultaneously and not one thing' is accepted, there is the fault of too wide application in the inference; ‘this has pot-ness because of both-ness of those which have pot-ness and the absence of it' when the reason is taken by the relation paryāpti, because the reason dose not
locus of the absence of substance-ness is quality etc. and which is determined by the inherence relation does not exists any where therefore the absence of occurrence exists in qualified existence also. Therefore there is no fault of too narrow application.
27. सम्बन्धित्वे सतीत्यनेन - Being relative the reason ether, is not related with anything by the relation of inherence which is determinant relation of state of being reason.
