因明義斷 1.18

1.18

有人破云：德所依因，闕所依故，因無所依，因體不成，故非宗法。其義云何？答：此亦不然。若有有法之宗，可說德所依故是宗家法。本無有法，是誰宗家之法，云是宗法而非遍？

Someone refutes this, saying: 'The reason "locus of qualities" lacks a locus; because the reason lacks a locus, the substance of the reason is unestablished, and therefore it is not a property of the subject.' What is the truth of this matter? Answer: This also is not so. If there is a subject with a dharmin, one can say that because it is a locus of qualities, it is a property belonging to the subject. Where originally there is no dharmin, whose subject's property could it be for one to say that it is a property of the subject yet not pervading?