1918.] The Tattva-cintamani. 309 
doubtful whether the major term abides in it or not. Seeing 
that the connection of the major term with the locus or minor 
term, may not necessarily involve a doubt, Gangesa prefers to 
define the minor term as that whose connection with the major 
. term is not known with certainty in consequence of the absence 
of a desire to know the connection, e.g. in the proposition “ the 
hill is full of fire,” the hill is the minor term whose connection 
with fire was hitherto neither investigated nor known. The 
minor term is so called not merely if there is an absence of 
knowledge of its connection with the major term, but also if 
the absence of knowledge is due to the absence of a desire to 
atrive at the knowledge. We cannot treat the minor term as 
such merely by establishing with it a connection of the major 
term if that connection has already been known, but we shall 
be justified in treating it as the minor term if there is in us a 
desire again to establish the connection. 
similar locus, a homogeneous, affirmative or positive example 
(sapaksa) is that in which the major term is known with cer- 
tainty to abide, ¢.g. the hill is full of fire, because it is full of 
smoke, as a kitchen. 
dissimilar locus, a heterogeneous, or negative example (vip- 
aksa) is that in which the major term is known not to abide, e.g. 
the hill is full of fire, because it is full of smoke; where there is 
no fire, there is no smoke, as a lake. 
‘WRT: | 
Consideration or Knowledge of Premisses. 
Consideration (paramarga) is the knowledge that the middle 
term in invariable concomitance with the major term abides 
in the minor, e.g. | 
The hill is full of fire, 
because it is full of smoke. 
og by saying that if smoke actually perceived were the cause, 
then inference could not take place from smoke that had been 
destroyed or that had not yet arrived. On hearing that there 
be be smoke here, a person can at once infer that there will 
fire here, although he does not actually perceive smoke 
