NOTES
161
of the non-established probandum. The' positive instance cited is colour and taste. In this positive instance there is the probandum " being the counter-correlate of the absolute non-existence located in a single entity". Let us assume Vayu (air) as the single entity. In Vayu there is the absolute non-existence both of colour and taste. There is the probans 'being an attribute." The Davaitin criticises the inference in detail. The term " vastu" in the inference means reality, and as such that part of the subject cannot be the counter-correlate of the non-existence present in itself. Hence the contradiction. The probans is inconstant in respect of knowability and nameability. These two attributes are not absent from any place. They are called kevalanvayi dharmas. As such there is no non-existence for them. Hence the probandum " being the counter-correlate of absolute non-existence located in a single entity" is not found in them. The probans, " being an attribute " is present there. Hence the inconstancy. Besides this, the inference is conditioned by an adjunct "being non-contradictory", An adjunct is that which is pervasive with the probandum and nonpervasive with the probans. "Being non-contradictory" is found in all those places where the probandum is present. Let us take the example itself, i.e. colour and taste. There is the adjunct there. Colour and taste are not opposed. They are found together in the fruit. The adjunct is not pervasive of the probans. The probans " being an attribute" is present in the subject. The adjunct is not there for the simple reason that reality and unreality are contradictories. An unacceptable counter-inference like the one formulated by the Advaitin is put forth by the Dvaitin. There is only a slight modification in the counter-inference. The term "vastu" is replaced by the term Dharmi (substrate). The conclusion reached by the counter-inference is not acceptable to the Advaitin, because there is nt> o•e substrate in which there is the non existence of the potness as .veil as the non-existence of non-potness. The Advaitin makes use of " pret;limption " (a pramal}a) to proVe indeterminability. He sta~s two general rules pertaining 11
