因明入正理論疏 2.51

2.51

述曰：此簡同異。《理門論》云：「又比量中，唯見此理，若所比處，此相審定（遍是宗法性也）。於餘同類，念此定有（同品定有性也）；於彼無處，念此遍無（異品遍無性也）。是故由此生決定解。」即是此中唯舉三能立。彼引本頌言：「如自決定已，悕他決定生，說宗法相應，所立餘遠離。」此說二比：一自、二他。自比處在弟子之位，此復有二：一、相比量，如見火相煙，知下必有火。二、言比量，聞師所說，比度而知。於此二量自生決定。他比處在師主之位，與弟子等，作其比量，悕他解生。上之二句，如次別配。彼論自釋下二句言：「為於所比顯宗法性，故說因言。為顯於此不相離性，故說喻言（順成返成宗因不相離性即是二喻）。為顯所比，故說宗言。」故因三相宗之法性，與所立宗說為相應。釋餘遠離言：「除此更無其餘支分，由是遮遣餘審察等及與合、結。」即是此論說唯此言，即簡別故。諸外道等立審察支，立敵皆於未立論前，先生審察問定宗徒，以為方便言申宗致。《集量》破云：「由汝父母生汝身故，方能立論；又由證者語具、床座等，方得立論，皆應名能立。」立者智生，望他宗智皆疎遠故，尚非能立，況餘法耶？古師所立八四三等為能立支，皆非親勝，所以不說，故說等言。其合、結支，離因、喻無，故不別立，性殊勝故。於喻過中無合、倒合，過為增勝，故名似立。至下當知。

The commentary says: This distinguishes similarity and difference. The Nyāyamukha says: 'Moreover, in inference, one only sees this principle: if in the subject to be inferred, this mark is ascertained (pervasive presence as a property of the subject); in other similar kinds, one recollects that this is definitely present (definite presence in the sapakṣa); and where that is absent, one recollects that this is completely absent (complete absence in the vipakṣa). Therefore, through this, a determinate understanding arises.' This is just the mentioning of only three proofs here. That work cites the root verse, saying: 'Just as having determined it oneself, wishing that another's determination arise, one states the concordance of the property of the subject and the exclusion of the rest from what is to be established.' This speaks of two inferences: first, for oneself; second, for others. Inference for oneself is in the position of a disciple; this again has two types: 1. Inference through marks: such as seeing the mark of fire, smoke, and knowing there must be fire below. 2. Inference through verbal testimony: hearing what the teacher says and knowing through inference. In these two pramāṇas, one generates determination oneself. Inference for others is in the position of the teacher: formulating an inference for disciples and the like, wishing that the other's understanding arise. The upper two lines correspond respectively to these. That treatise itself explains the lower two lines, saying: 'In order to reveal the property of the subject in the subject to be inferred, the statement of the reason is made. In order to reveal the inseparable nature in this, the statement of the example is made (conforming to establish and conversely establishing the inseparable nature of thesis and reason are the two examples). In order to reveal the subject to be inferred, the statement of the thesis is made.' Therefore, the property of the subject with the three characteristics of the reason is said to be concordant with the thesis to be established. Explaining 'the exclusion of the rest', it says: 'Other than these, there are no other members; thereby excluding the inquiry (jijñāsā) and so forth, as well as the application (upanaya) and conclusion (nigamana).' This is just this treatise saying 'only these', which is precisely to distinguish and exclude them. The various non-Buddhists establish the member of inquiry; both proponent and opponent, before establishing an argument, first generate an inquiry to question and determine the thesis-adherents, using this as an expedient to state the import of the thesis. The Pramāṇasamuccaya refutes this, saying: 'Because your parents gave birth to your body, you can then establish an argument; and because of the witness's vocal organs, seat, and so forth, you can then establish an argument—all should be called proofs.' The proponent's knowledge arising is still distant with respect to the other's knowledge of the thesis, and is not yet a proof; how much less other factors? The eight, four, or three members established by ancient masters are none of them direct and principal, and so are not mentioned; thus it says 'and so forth'. The members of application and conclusion do not exist apart from reason and example, and so are not separately established, because their nature is not superior. Among the faults of the example, lacking application or having inverse application are excessive faults, and hence called pseudo-proofs. This will be understood below.