[Footnote 236: The whole (as the jar) resides by intimate relation in its parts (as the jar's two halves). But the eternal substances, ether, time, the soul, mind, and the atoms of earth, water, fire, and air, do not thus reside in anything, although, of course, the category _viśesha_ does reside in them by intimate relation. The word "substances" excludes _tantutva_, and "existing in intimate relation" excludes ether, &c.] [Footnote 237: Intermediate between infinite and infinitesimal, all eternal substances being the one or the other.] [Footnote 238: The _viruddha-hetu_ is that which is never found where the major term is.] [Footnote 239: This and much more of the whole discussion is taken from the Kusumáñjali, v. 2, and I extract my note on the passage there. "The older Naiyáyikas maintained that the argument 'the mountain has fire because it has blue smoke,' involved the fallacy of vyápyatvásiddhi, because the alleged middle term was unnecessarily restricted (see Siddhánta Muktáv. p. 77). The moderns, however, more wisely consider it as a harmless error, and they would rather meet the objection by asserting that there is no proof to establish the validity of the assumed middle term."] [Footnote 240: For the _upádhi_ cf. pp. 7, 8.] [Footnote 241: As in the former case it would be clear that it is a subject for separate discussion; and in the latter you would be liable to the fault of _áśrayásiddhi_, a "baseless inference," since your subject (or minor term), being itself non-existent, cannot be the locus or subject of a negation (cf. Kusumáñjali, iii. 2). "Just as that subject from which a given attribute is excluded cannot be unreal, so neither can an unreal thing be the subject of a negation."] [Footnote 242: If God is known, then His existence must be granted; if He is not known, how can we argue about Him? I read lines 15, 16, in p. 120 of the Calcutta edition, _vikalpaparáhatatvát_, and then begin the next clause with _syád etat_. The printed text, _vikalpaparáhataḥ syát tad etat_, seems unintelligible.] [Footnote 243: The aggregate of the various subtile bodies constitutes Hiraṇyagarbha, or the supreme soul viewed in His relation to the world as creator, while the aggregate of the gross bodies similarly constitutes his gross body (viráj).] [Footnote 244: The usual reading is _tasthur_ for _tasthe_.] [Footnote 245: For these divisions of the _anyonyáśraya_ fallacy, see _Nyáyasútra vṛitti_, i. 39 (p. 33).] [Footnote 246: For _tívra_ cf. _Yoga sútras_, i. 21, 22.] CHAPTER XII. THE JAIMINI-DARŚANA.