xix PAGE
XXIX (262-265) Non-existence of the probandum in the example is urged in respect of the Advaitin's infer71 ence XXX (266-270) Refutation of the Advaitin by the reductio ad absurdum method 72 XXXI (271-294) Refutation of the illusory nature of dream objects is taken up in connection with the discussion 74 of the hypothetical argument XXXII (295-297) The famous Tattvapradlpikii inference in order to establish illusoriness stated ~0 XXXIII (298-311) A detailed criticism of the same 81 XXXIV (312-327) The siddhantin proceeds to establish the reality of the universe on the ground of its non-sublation 85 XXXV (328-330) The reality of the difference of Brahman from the universe is taken up for discussion 89 XXXVI (331-338) Scriptural statements conflicting with it are criticised: The criticism of the s'ruti : Nel}a naniisti; One only without a second; Reality knowledge, infinitude etc. 90 XXXVII (339-344) The intelligibility of the concept of 93 difference is taken for a detailed consideration XXXVIII (345-348) Refutation of the inference establishing the illusory nature of difference . 96 XXXIX (349, 350) An adjunct is urged as vitiating the 97 inference . XL (351-381) The case against the possibility of perception apprehending difference is stated 98 XLI (382-404) The case against difference is answered in great detail .. 106 • XLII (405-412) The Siddhantin's position is summed up . 112 XLIII (4B-426) The cognition of difference by witness• 115 consciousness is explained XLIV l427-437) The function of witness-consciousness as
.
