 The problem of universals, as we have seen, is at the epicentre of the debate between Hindu philosophers and their Buddhist opponents. The doctrine of exclusion (apoha) is the Buddhist attempt to account for the relation between concepts and sensory content. The doctrine of apoha basically claims that the term ‘cow’ does not refer to the universal ‘cowness’ or ‘cowhood’ because there is no such general entity; rather, the term refers to every individual that is not a non-cow. The apoha theory of meaning is originally propounded by Dignāga and his followers is an attempt to explain the functioning of language, conceptual thought and inference without appeal to real universals. For these Buddhists, universals are merely imaginary constructs which lack causal efficacy and the awarenesses that they produce are faint (asphuṭābha). The unique particulars alone are ultimately real, but they do not have any common properties, and thus cannot be brought under any concept, nor can they be expressed by words. They are inexpressible. Dignāga explains that language functions through what is known as “exclusion of the other” (anyāpoha/apoha). This claim needs to be unpacked. Matilal explains,