In the history of the East Asian tradition of Buddhist logic, Wǒnhyo 元曉 is famous for his antinomic inference directed against Xuanzang’s inference of consciousness-only. Recent studies by Shigeki Moro (2017), by Ippei Okamoto (2018) and by Sung-chul Kim (2017) have brought into light the close relation between Mungwe 文 軌 and Wǒnhyo. They fi nd that Mungwe in the last part of his Yin ming ru zheng li lun shu 因明入正理論疏 has discussed an inference which is the same one as Wǒnhyo’s antinomic inference and that Wǒnhyo in a fragment of his P’an biryang non 判比量論 has cited Mungwe’s discussion. The present author, through reexamining the passages from Mungwe as found by Moro, Okamoto and Kim, tries to show some new facts concerning the relation between Mungwe and Wǒnhyo that: Wǒnhyo’s antinomic inference is known to Mungwe. The latter has offered a criticism of it. Zenju 善珠 in his Inmyō ronsho myōtō shō 因明論疏明燈抄 cites a passage from P’an biryang non which shows that Mungwe’s criticism is known to Wǒnhyo and Wǒnhyo has made a reply to it. The point of Wǒnhyo’s reply is that his inference will be free from the fault as pointed out by Mungwe if the property to be proved of this inference is reformulated into the condition of being separate from the visual consciousness that is well established (離極成眼識). The fi rst part of Wǒnhyo’s discussion on the antinomic inference in P’an biryang non has been reconstructed by Sung-chul Kim (2017). The above mentioned fragment cited by Zenju could be regarded as the last part of Wǒnhyo’s discussion on this topic, while the middle part, which probably contains Wǒnhyo’s more citations from Mungwe’s criticism, is still missing. At last, the present author entertains a hypothesis that the former part of Mungwe’s Yin ming ru zheng li lun shu, which is actually the source of Wǒnhyo’s knowledge of the inference of consciousnessonly, is written before the arrival of the antinomic inference in China, while the last part of this work, which contains a criticism of the antinomic inference, is written after the arrival of this inference. However, whether or not the antinomic inference arrives in China before Xauzang’s death in 664, namely, whether or not Xuanzang knows Wǒnhyo’s inference, is still an open question.
