[Footnote 284: This is Prabhákara's view (see Siddh. Muktáv., p. 118). The first knowledge is in the form "This is a jar;" the second knowledge is the cognition of this perception in the form "I perceive the jar;" and this latter produces authoritativeness (_prámáṇya_), which resides in it as its characteristic.] [Footnote 285: Substances are "intimate causes" to their qualities, and only substances have qualities; now if authoritativeness, which is a characteristic of right knowledge, were caused by it, it would be a quality of it, that is, right knowledge would be its intimate cause and therefore a substance.] [Footnote 286: The eye, &c., would be its instrumental causes.] [Footnote 287: The first three categories "substance," "quality," and "action," are called _játis_ or species; the last four, "genus," "_viśesha_," "intimate relation," and "non-existence," are called _upádhis_ or "general characteristics."] [Footnote 288: The Púrva Mímáṃsá denies that recollection is right knowledge.] [Footnote 289: Wrong knowledge is produced by the same instrumental causes (as the eye, &c.) which produced right knowledge, but by these _together with a "defect,"_ as biliousness, distance &c.] [Footnote 290: _Scil._ if there be _doshábháva_ there is _pramá_; if not, not. In p. 132, line 20, I read _doshábhávatvena_ for _doshábhávasahakṛitatvena_.] [Footnote 291: _Anyathásiddhatvam_ means _niyatapúrvavartitve sati anávaśyakatvam_.] [Footnote 292: _Scil._ or the absence of "defect," _doshábháva_.] [Footnote 293: Wrong knowledge has _doshábháva_ or the presence of a "defect" as its cause, in addition to the common causes.] [Footnote 294: Wrongness of knowledge (_apramátva_) can only reside in knowledge as a characteristic or quality thereof; it cannot reside in a jar. The jar is, of course, produced by other instrumental causes than those of knowledge (as, _e.g._, the potter's stick, &c.), but it is not produced by these other causes _in combination_ with being also produced by the instrumental causes of knowledge (with which it has nothing directly to do); and so by a quibble, which is less obvious in Sanskrit than in English, this wretched sophism is allowed to pass muster. The jar is not produced-by-any-other-instrumental-causes-than-those-of-knowledge,-while- at-the-same-time-it-is-produced-by-these.] [Footnote 295: I suppose this is the argument given at the close of the previous long púrva-paksha.] [Footnote 296: These words "and is other than defect" (_dosha-vyatirikta_) are, of course, meaningless as far as right knowledge is concerned; they are simply added to enable the author to bring in "wrong knowledge" as an example. Wrong knowledge is caused by the causes of knowledge _plus_ "defect;" right knowledge by the former alone.]