因明入正理論疏 2.102

2.102

此論所說現量相違有四過合：現量、自教、世間、自語。比量亦四：比量、自教、世間、自語。自教亦四：自教、比量、世間、自語。世間二違：世間、比量。或加自教，或加自語。自語亦四：自語、比量、自教、世間。能別不成，唯一能別，雖違他教，作他比量，皆非失故。所別不成，唯一所別。或加比量：彼我非思，許是我故，如勝論我。俱不極成，唯違自一。或加比量：彼我非和合因緣，許是我故，如數論我。相符唯一，謂自相符。如是總說有二違一：能別、相符。有二違二：所別及俱不極成。有四違四：現量、比量、自教、自語。其世間相違不定，或二、或三、或四。如前總為四類。

Regarding what this treatise explains, contradiction with perception has combinations of four fallacies: perception, one's own doctrine, worldly consensus, and one's own words. Inference also has four: inference, one's own doctrine, worldly consensus, and one's own words. One's own doctrine also has four: one's own doctrine, inference, worldly consensus, and one's own words. Worldly consensus has two contradictions: worldly consensus and inference; or add one's own doctrine, or add one's own words. One's own words also has four: one's own words, inference, one's own doctrine, and worldly consensus. In unestablishedness of the qualifier, there is only the single qualifier; although it contradicts the other's doctrine, when framing an inference for the other (parānumāna), neither is a fault. In unestablishedness of the qualificand, there is only the single qualificand; or add inference: ‘That self is not thought, because of being accepted as a self, like the Vaiśeṣika self.’ In unestablished for both, it only contradicts the single [doctrine] of oneself; or add inference: ‘That self is not the cause-and-condition of combination, because of being accepted as a self, like the Sāṃkhya self.’ In already established by consensus, there is only one, namely, already agreed with oneself. In this way, generally speaking, there are two that contradict one: the qualifier and being already established by consensus. There are two that contradict two: the qualificand and unestablished for both. There are four that contradict four: perception, inference, one's own doctrine, and one's own words. Contradiction with worldly consensus is variable: either two, three, or four. As stated before, they form four categories in total.