Nyaya Ratnamala of Parthasarathi Misra 4.4.p7

4.4.p7

sarvavipakṣābhāvo na labhyataityarthaḥ atra ca samarthanamuktam tatrāsyādṛṣṭimātreṇa gamakaḥ sahacāriṇa iti tatreti vipakṣa ityarthaḥ| etaduktaṃ bhavati| mā nāma sarvavipakṣābhāvo liṅgasya saitsīt adarśanantu vipakṣeṣu liṅgasyāstyeva tāvatā ca sahacārī dṛṣṭo dhūmādiḥ sahacāriṇo'gnyādergamako bhavati| yattu sahacāritvamapi sarvatra durlabhaṃ draṣṭumityuktaṃ tatrāpyuttaramuktam|

The meaning is that the absence in all counter-instances cannot be obtained. And here the defense was stated: "There, merely by its non-observation, it is an indicator of its co-present [partner]"—here, "there" means in the counter-instance. This is what is meant: Let it be granted that the absence of the inferential mark in all counter-instances is not established; non-observation of the inferential mark in counter-instances certainly exists, and by that much, smoke or the like, being observed as co-present, becomes an indicator of fire or the like, which is co-present. As for the claim that co-presence too is impossible to see everywhere, in that regard also an answer has been given: