因明入正理論疏 3.12

3.12

述曰：此成違義，由初常宗，空等為同品，瓶等為異品，所作性因，同品遍非有，異品遍有，九句因中第四句也。應為相違量云：聲是無常，所作性故，譬如瓶等。由第二宗，空為同品，以電、瓶等而為異品，勤勇發故因，於同遍無，於異品電無、瓶等上有，九句因中第六句也。此之二因返成無常，違宗所陳法自相故，名相違因。故《理門》云：「於同有及二，在異無是因，返此名相違，所餘皆不定。」此所作性因，翻九句中第二正因，彼同品有、異品非有，此同非有、異品有故。此勤勇因，翻九句中第八正因，彼同品有非有、異品非有，此同非有、異品有非有故。上已數論，略不繁述。

Commentary: This establishes the meaning of contradiction. In the first thesis of permanence, space and the like are the similar instances (sapakṣa), and pots and the like are the dissimilar instances (vipakṣa). The reason 'because of being produced' is universally absent from the similar instances and universally present in the dissimilar instances, which is the fourth clause among the nine clauses of the reason. The counter-inference should be made: 'Sound is impermanent, because of being produced, like a pot, etc.' In the second thesis, space is the similar instance, while lightning, pots, and the like are the dissimilar instances. The reason 'because of arising from effort' is universally absent from the similar instances, and in the dissimilar instances is absent from lightning and present on pots and the like, which is the sixth clause among the nine clauses of the reason. These two reasons turn out to establish impermanence, contradicting the own-nature of the property stated in the thesis; hence they are named contradictory reasons (viruddha-hetu). Therefore the Nyāyamukha states: 'Being present in the similar [instances] and in both, and absent in the dissimilar, is the reason; the reverse of this is called contradictory, and all the rest are inconclusive (anaikāntika).' This reason 'because of being produced' reverses the second valid reason among the nine clauses: that one is present in similar instances and absent in dissimilar instances, whereas this one is absent in similar instances and present in dissimilar instances. This reason 'because of arising from effort' reverses the eighth valid reason among the nine clauses: that one is present and absent in similar instances, and absent in dissimilar instances, whereas this one is absent in similar instances, and present and absent in dissimilar instances. Having already been discussed several times above, it is briefly passed over without verbosity.