________________
द्वितीयं लक्षणम्
४५
(३१) न च तथापि साध्यवद्भिन्नावृत्तित्वमित्येवास्तु लक्षणं किं साध्याभाववदित्यनेन इति वाच्यम् । यथोक्तलक्षणे तस्य अप्रवेशेन वैयर्थ्याभावात् तस्यापि लक्षणान्तरत्वात् ।
न च तथापि साध्यवद्भिन्नवृत्तिर्यस्तद्वदवृत्तित्वमेवास्तु किं साध्याभावपदेन इति वाच्यम् । तादृशद्रव्यत्वादिमद्वृत्तित्वात् असम्भवापत्तेः । साध्याभावेत्यत्र साध्यपदमप्यत एव, द्रव्यत्वादेरपि द्रव्यत्वाभावाभावत्वात् भावरूपाभावस्य च अधिकरणभेदेन भेदाभावात् ।
__ (31) Nor it can be said-let there be the non- existence in that which is different from that which has that which is to be established as the definition, what is the need of the expression ‘that which has the absence of that which is to be established ? This is because even there is no useless-ness of that expression due to non-inclusion of it in the said definition because that is also a different definition.
Nor it should be said-let be the non-existence in that which has that which exists in that which is different from that which has that which is to be established, what is the need of the expression 'absence of that which is to be established?
Because there will be a fault of impossibility, because it exists in that which has such substance-ness. In the expression “the absence of sādhya that which is to be established', the word that which is to be established, is for the same reason only sādhya the substance-ness, also is the absence of the absence of substance-ness because the absence which has the positive form is not different due to the difference in the substratum.
