因明入正理論疏 2.55

2.55

述曰：下隨標似列指釋結，有三：初隨標列、次隨列指法、後隨指釋結。列名有二：初隨古列、後隨今列，此隨古也。陳那唯立此五，天主又加餘四，故《理門論》云：「非彼相違義能遣。」義如前說。若依結文，或列有三：初顯乖法、次顯非有、後顯虛功，此即初也。乖法有二：自教自語唯違自而為失；餘之三種違自共而為過。又現比違立敵之智，自教違所依憑世間，依勝義而無違，依世俗而有犯。據世間之義立，違世間之理智。自語，立論之法，有體有義，體據義釋，立、敵共同，後不順前，義不符體，標宗既已乖角，能立何所順成？故此五違皆是過攝。

The commentary says: Below, following the designation of the pseudo to list, indicate, explain, and conclude, there are three parts: first, listing according to the designation; next, indicating the rule according to the list; last, explaining and concluding according to the indication. Listing the names has two aspects: first, listing according to the ancients; second, listing according to the moderns. This follows the ancients. Diṅnāga established only these five; Śaṅkarasvāmin added another four. Thus the Nyāyamukha says: 'It is not that the opposite meaning can negate it,' whose meaning is as explained before. If based on the concluding text, they may be classified into three: first, showing divergence from principles; next, showing unreality; last, showing futile effort. This is the first. Divergence from principles has two: one's own doctrine and one's own words are faults that contradict only oneself; the other three are faults that contradict oneself and others mutually. Furthermore, perception and inference contradict the cognition of proponent and opponent; one's own doctrine contradicts what one relies upon; the world—relying on ultimate truth there is no contradiction, but relying on conventional truth there is an infraction. It is established according to worldly meaning, and contradicts worldly rational cognition. As for one's own words: the rule of argumentation has an entity and a meaning; the entity is explained according to the meaning and is shared by proponent and opponent; if the latter does not accord with the former, and the meaning does not tally with the entity, once the stated thesis is already contradictory, what could the proof conform to and establish? Therefore, these five contradictions are all subsumed under faults.