Tattva Sangraha Vol 1

SR No.: 007608
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Kamlashila, Ganganatha Jha
Publisher: Oriental Research Institute Vadodra
Publication Year: 1937
Total Pages: 753
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 42 MB

Page 440

EXAMINATION OF SÄMÄNYA', THE UNIVERSAL
445
proceed from the eternal, one all-pervading Universal', as conceived by the other party like the notions of the Cook' ;-the notions of the
Tree', etc. are of the said character ; hence there is perception of a character concomitant with the contrary of the Opponent's conclusion. As being in succession and the rest are all concomitant with non-eternality, which is contrary to eternality (postulated by the Opponent). What is eternal cannot have any effective action, either successive or simultaneous,-as both are incompatible; hence the Reason adduced by us cannot be regarded as
Inconclusive'. As regards the fallacy of our Corroborative Instance being devoid of the Probandum', that has been already disposed of by us in detail ; hence the Instance also cannot be said to be unproven'.
The Author states another argument in annulment of the Opponent's conclusion-All the objections, etc. etc. these objections were set forth under Text 674, above, where it has been shown that one thing cannot subsist in several things; similarly in the section dealing with the Composite, under Text 607.-(810-811)
The following Text suns up the section
TEXT (812). THUS HAS BEEN REJECTED THE UNIVERSAL ' AS AN ENTIRELY DISTINCT
ENTITY. AS REGARDS THE UNIVERSAL 'POSTULATED BY THE FOLLOWERS OF Jaimini, THAT IS GOING TO BE REJECTED
UNDER THE CHAPTER ON SYĀDV.DA'
(CHAPTER XX).—(812)
COMMENTARY
The Universal' has been postulated by the Vaishēşika and his followers as something entirely distinct froin the Individuals; and we have stated the objections against this doctrine. The Jainue and the followers of Jaimini have postulated the Universal ' as non-different from the Individual, and also of both kinds; and this will be examined, in due course, under the Chapter on Syadvada'; on the present occasion, we had set out to criticise the doctrine of the Nyāya-vaishēşika; hence we do not take up the other doctrine, which would be somewhat irrelevant to the Context.-(812)
End of the Examination of the Universal',