________________
चतुर्थं लक्षणम्
सत्त्वान्नाव्याप्तिः ।
___ (४४) न च कपिसंयोगाभाववान् सत्त्वादित्यादौ साध्याभावस्य कपिसंयोगादेनिरवच्छिन्नाधिकरणत्वाप्रसिद्ध्या अव्याप्तिरिति वाच्यम् । केवलान्वयिनि अभावादित्यनेन ग्रन्थकृतैव एतद्दोषस्य वक्ष्यमाणत्वात् ।
(४५) न च पृथिवी कपिसंयोगादित्यादौ पृथिवीत्वाभाववति जलादौ यावत्येव कपिसंयोगाभावसत्त्वादतिव्याप्तिरिति वाच्यम् । तन्निष्ठपदेन तत्र निरवच्छिन्नवृत्तिमत्त्वस्य विवक्षितत्वात् । इत्थञ्च
also. Therefore there is no fault of too narrow application.
(44) It should not be said that-there is a fault of too narrow application in the inference; "this has the absence of the conjunction of monkey because this has existence” due to non establishment of the state of being a substratum of the conjunction of monkey as not determined by anything. This is because this fault would be mentioned by author himself by the expression, “Absence in the pure affirmative inference.”
(45) Nor it should be said that-there is a fault of too wide application in the inference; “it is earth because it has the conjunction of monkey.” This is because the absence of the conjunction of monkey exists in all water etc., which are substrata of the absence of earth-hood, because of by the expression “existing in that” the existence which is not determined by any thing is to be said. In this way, the absence of the conjunction of monkey is not the absence which has existence not determined by anything in the
absence of the conjunction which exists in quality has incomplete occurrence.
