Which of the following statements is logically fallacious, as per the classical Indian school of logic, because the middle term is non-exclusive?

The faulty argument is that all things are non-eternal because they are knowable.

Here the subject is everything whatever, so knowability belongs to the entire field without exception.

A middle that is present everywhere excludes nothing and leaves no negative case where it is absent.

Without any instance from which the reason is excluded, no invariable tie to the predicate can be fixed.

A reason so all-embracing that it excludes nothing is the non-exclusive, inconclusive middle.