Pramanavartika overview

3a: 4 - penultimate

• 3b: 4 - 12
  • "Of three types": 4-8
    • effect sign: 4abc
    • nature sign: 4cd
    • non-observation sign:
      • non-appearing: 5ab
      • suitable to appear
        • definition: 5cd
        • divisions: 6
        • dispelling debates: 7-8
  • "Just" (definite number): 9-12
    • succession: 9-10
      • collection of causes to proves the suitability of producing effect; therefore, not a 4th sign: 9
      • collection of causes cannot prove definite production of effect: 10
    • simultaneous: 11-12
• 3d (pseudo-signs): 13 - 16
  • incomplete collection of causes is not correct: 13
  • general effect to particular cause is not correct: 14
  • non-simultaneous different substances and not cause and effect is not correct: 15-16
• 3c (relationship of indispensability of the sign and predicate): 17 - penultimate
  • Refuting that the reverse pervasion is established through the mere non-observation of the sign in the discordant position: 17 - 24
    • Ācārya Dignāga did not assert that the reverse pervasion is established by the mere non-perception of the sign in the discordant class: 17
    • Refutation by means of six contradictions with scripture: 18-22
      • the words of Dignāga’s Gateway of Reasoning become defiled:
        • actual refutation: 18ab
        • dispelling objections: 18cd-19
      • stating that [signs] with remainder are mistaken would be incorrect: 20ab
      • those explained as merely possessing the reverse pervasion would be signs: 20c
      • doubts regarding the reverse pervasion would not eliminate [something] being a correct sign: 20d
      • a distinguishing feature, i.e. “object of hearing”, would be suitable as a sign: 21-22ab
      • the Ācārya’s refutation of the syllogisms of Vaiśeṣika would not be suitable: 22cd
    • direct perception that commonly refutes the Buddhists and Non-Buddhists who assert as such: 23
    • refutation of Non-Buddhists who assert as such by way of the internal contradictions of their assertions: 24
  • The proof that the ascertainment by valid cognition of the forward and reverse pervasions of a correct sign is taken to depend upon the ascertainment by valid cognition of the relationship of indispensability of the sign and predicate: 25 - 35
    • way of establishing the pervasion of positive signs in our own system: 25-30
      • establishment of the forward and reverse pervasions of correct effect and nature signs is established in dependence upon the relationship between the sign and predicate: 25
      • otherwise, consequence that the reverse pervasion is not established: 26
      • otherwise, consequence that the forward pervasion is not established: 27
      • dispelling of objections: 28-30
    • way of establishing the pervasion of the negation signs in our own system: 31-35
      • same as v25 but for non-observation of cause and pervader: 31ab
      • plus non-observation of nature: 31cd
      • non-observation signs = 3, but many by way of mode of statement: 32
      • summary of v17-25 (refuting, then est of pervasion depends on asc or relationship): 33
        • v17-24 summarised by: 33d
        • v25abc summarised by 33bc
        • v25cd summarised by 33a
      • summary of depending on relationship + absurdity of not: 34
        • v26 summarised by 34ab
        • v27 summarised by 34cd
      • are impermanent and product same substance? 35ab
      • 35cd???
  • Extensive indication of the valid cognitions that ascertain the relationship:
    • Positive signs:
      • Effect signs: 36 - 40
      • Nature signs: 41 - 198
        • Summary verse 41
        • Dispelling objections and presentation of other-exclusions 42 - 187
          • Brief indication 42 - 44
          • Extensive explanation 45 - 187
            • Extensive explanation the reasoning proving that terms and conceptual consciousnesses of positive phenomena are eliminative-engagers 45 - 186ab
              • reasoning undermining that terms and conceptual consciousnesses are collective-engagers 45 - 60
                • general explanation 45
                • dispelling objections 46 - 47ab
                • summary 47cd
                • fault of asserting as collective engagers 48ab
                • dispelling objections 48cd
                • summary 49
                • dispelling of objections regarding indicating that ascertaining consciousnesses are eliminative-engagers 50-51
                • established meaning of the previous explanations 52-53
                • refutations and dispelling of faults 54-60
              • To dispel the objection that the proponents of exclusion would have a similar fault through investigating whether terms and conceptual consciousnesses are one substance or different substances and then to explain the reasoning proving that terms and conceptual consciousnesses are eliminative-engagers 61 - 69
              • General presentation of other-exclusions 70 - 93
              • refute other systems of semantics and to explain the way terms are applied by way of other-exclusions that eliminate not-that 94 - 115ab
              • eliminate objections 115cd - 186ab
                • Dispelling the consequence that conceptual consciousnesses are mutually dependent 115cd - 123
                • Dispelling the consequence that expressive words are not pervaded by being eliminative object-possessors 124 - 130
                • Dispelling the consequence that if things are expressed by terms, then terms and later valid cognitions are purposeless 131 -
                  • Refuting Samkhya 165 - ???
                    • The consequence of many causes would be purposeless 166cd - 176ab
                      • Refutation 166cd - 167
                      • Proof 168
                      • Dispelling objections 169 - 176ab
                    • The consequence of cause and effect being mixed-up 176cd - 180
                    • The consequence of their applications being mixed-up 181 - 182
            • of negative phenomena 187abc
            • Summary 187cd
        • What are the syllogisms of correct nature sign possessing such a relationship? 188 - 195b
        • to extensively explain the valid cognitions that ascertain the relationship in correct effect signs 195c - 198
      • Summary of these two: 199
    • Negation signs:
      • non-appearing: 200 - 202b
      • suitable to appear: 202c - 206
    • Dispelling objections: 207 onwards