因明入正理論疏 1.89

1.89

問：「何故但宗說差別性，因、喻中無？」答：「宗有一成一不成，故但說宗差別性。因、喻唯成，無不成，無簡不說差別性。如因三相雖有差別，不欲取此上不相離性，一許一不許成其能立，所依便非，由斯不說差別性故。《理門》唯云：『宗等多言說能立，是中唯隨自意樂，為所成立說名宗，非彼相違義能遣。』不說所別、能別極成及差別性，此論獨言。」

Question: "Why is 'qualified nature' spoken of only for the thesis, and not for the reason and example?" Answer: "The thesis has one [party] who establishes it and one who does not; therefore, 'qualified nature' is stated only for the thesis. The reason and example must only be established and have no non-establishment; having nothing to exclude, 'qualified nature' is not stated for them. For instance, although the three characteristics of the reason have distinctions, one does not intend to take the inseparable nature upon them—where one accepts it and one does not—to constitute the proof, for then its basis would be invalid; thus 'qualified nature' is not stated for them. The Nyāyamukha says only: 'A thesis and the rest are many statements called a proof. Among them, that which is solely intended by oneself to be established is called the thesis, provided it is not subverted by contradicting meanings.' It does not speak of the qualified and qualifier being mutually established, nor of 'qualified nature'; this treatise alone states it."