365bet娱乐

TC proponent does not accept this definition. 82 -(s膩dhakapram膩峁嘺,
The sadhakabadhakapramanabhava i. e. - (sadhakapr
badhakapramana) can be understood as follows: (1)
(-sadhakapramana, badhakapramana), (2) (sadhakapram膩na,
-badhakap ramana), and (3) (-sadhakapramana, -badhakapramana).
Here, the proponent rules out the first and the second cases and
the third case is also ruled out in the subsequent portion.
With regard to the absence of both (ubhay膩bhava),
V. N. 1986a: 146ff).
cf. (Jha,
TEXT-4b: napy abhavadvayam tatha, badhakaprama峁嘺bh膩vasya
vyarthatvat. hrdade岣� paksatve 'pi badhahetvasiddhyader
补惫补蝉测补办补迟惫别苍补苍耻尘颈迟测补苍耻迟辫腻诲腻迟.
TRANSLATION: Moreover, even the two absences are not (the
subjectness (paksata)), because the absence of the rejective
evidence (in that case) will become redundant. Even if the lake
becomes a subject, the inferential cognition is not allowed to
occur because the rejective evidence (badha), and non-
establishment of probans (hetvasiddhi) etc. are inevitable.
NOTES: The proponent says the two absences namely, the
absence of the supportive evidence and the absence of the
rejective evidence also cannot be subjectness. The two absences
abh膩vadvayam of X and Y is (-X, -Y). Here, it is
(-sadhakap ramana, -badhakapramana). When there is an absence of
cognition of probandum (sadhya) and there is an absence of
cognition of absence of probandum, the subjectness occurs.
the same reason in the case of absence of both (ubhayabhava),
But by