Nyāya Sūtras 75

75.2

katham?

75.3

sarvapramāṇapratiṣedhāc ca pratiṣedhānupapattiḥ ||

Nyāyasūtra 2.1.13: And because of the denial of all means of valid cognition, the denial is untenable.

75.4

traikālyāsiddher ity asya hetor yady udāharaṇam upādīyate hetvarthasya sādhakatvaṃ dṛṣṭānte darśayitavyam iti,

If an example is adduced for this reason, "because establishment across the three times is impossible," it must be shown in the example that the meaning of the logical reason has the capacity to prove [the probandum];

75.5

na ca tarhi pratyakṣādīnām aprāmāṇyam/ atha pratyakṣādīnām aprāmāṇyam, upādīyamānam apy udāharaṇaṃ nārthaṃ sādhayiṣyatīti so 'yaṃ sarvapramāṇavyāhato hetur ahetuḥ; ``siddhāntam abhyupetya tadvirodhī viruddhaḥ'' iti/ vākyārtho hy asya siddhāntaḥ/ sa ca vākyārthaḥ pratyakṣādīni nārthaṃ sādhayantītīdaṃ cāvayavānām upādānam arthasya sādhanāyeti/ atha nopādīyate apradarśitaṃ hetvarthasya dṛṣṭāntena sādhakatvam iti niṣedho nopapadyate hetutvāsiddher iti//

and then perception and the others would not lack the status of means of valid cognition. If perception and the others lack the status of means of valid cognition, then even an adduced example will not prove the matter; so this reason, being contradicted by all means of valid cognition, is a non-reason; as it is said: "Having accepted a tenet, that which contradicts it is contradictory." For the meaning of the sentence is his tenet; and that meaning of the sentence is that perception and the others do not establish an object, whereas this adducing of the components of an inference is for the purpose of establishing the object. If, on the other hand, [an example] is not adduced, then the proving power of the meaning of the logical reason is not demonstrated by an example, and so the denial is untenable because its status as a logical reason is unestablished.