________________
CHAPTER VII
of knowledge according to Buddhism-relation is unreal (avastu). Pursuing his demonstration of the unreality of relation Dharmakirti makes a searching analysis into the possible kinds and the anatomy of a relational situation and endeavours to show that the Naiyayika's defence of the reality of a relation is entirely baseless.1
213
Assuming the opponent's viewpoint, Dharmakirti argues that the only two' possible ways of entertaining a relation in general, are by treating it as (a) Dependence (päratantrya) or rather, interdependence, and (b) Interpenetration (rupaślesa) or interfusion, of the relata entering into the relation in question. If we grant the first alternative, then the question arises whether the 'dependence' is between two full-fledged existents (nispannayoḥ) or between existents which have not yet emerged into full being (aniṣpannayoḥ). If it is, on the one hand, between two full-fledged existents, then the
the means of cognising samaväya; the former considers that samavāya is apprehended by perception and the latter by inference-pratyakṣaḥ samavaya iti naiyāyikā āhuḥ / NKB, p. 961; samaväyo'tindriyaḥ anumeya eva iti vaiśeşikā āhuḥ / Ibid., p. 962; pratyaleṣaḥ samavaya iti naiyāyikās tadapy anupapannaṁ samaväyo'tindriyaḥ...VD, p. 353, also UV thereon. Samyoga also is maintained, by the Naiyayika, to be apprehended by perception but by two senses only. Vide TS, p. 87 (Notes).
and
See the last line of ka. 1, quoted infra, p. 214, f.n. 2.
Jain Education International
1.
2. sambhandho'rthānāṁ
päratantryalakṣaṇo vä syād rupaśleşa
lakṣaṇo va syät? PKM, p. 104. See also p. 214, f.n. 2. The context in which the problem is treated is the question of the relatedness among the atoms in a so-called concrete object. The Buddhist assumes an object to be an aggregation (sanghata) of unrelated (asambaddha) atoms.
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org