________________
98
TATTVASANGRAHA : CHAPTER II.
Admitting (for argument's sake) the validity of the Theist's arguments, the following Texts proceed to point out another objection
TEXTS (92-93).
YOUR REASONINGS MAY NOT BE BESET WITH THE DEFECTS URGED ABOVE ; AND YET THE CREATOR CANNOT BE one, BECAUSE THE FALSITY OF SUCH A PROPOSITION HAS BEEN SHOWN ABOVE ; AND WHEN THE ONENESS OF THE CREATOR IS NOT PROVED, WHEREIN
COULD OMNISCIENCE'SUBSIST 1-(92-93)
COMMENTARY.
The defecte urgeil above-ending with being contrary to Inference (Text 86).
Tho upshot of the whole is as follows: Though it may be true that the reasonings put forward succeed in establishing an Intelligent Creator of such things as the Body, Mountains and so forth, -yet it is by no means certain that the Creator of one particular thing is the same as that of another thing; becauso it is quite possible that each effect may have its own separate Cause (Creator); in fact, in the case of such things as the House and the like, it is found that they are made by many persons; hence it is not possible to establish that there is only one Creator for all things. And under the circumstances, how can 'omniscience be regarded as proved ?
Prashastamati has put forward the following argument for proving a single Orvator :- All beings, from Brahmā down to the Pishacha must have over them a single All-Superior Being, because among themselves thore are found to be of varying grades of superiority ;- in the ordinary world it is found that where there are several persons of varying grades of superiority, they are always under the sway of one Superior Being; e.g, the controllers of the House, the village, the city and the province are all under one Sovereign Emperor of the entire world; and all such beings as serpents, Raksasas, Yakşcts and such other beings are possessed of varying grades of superiority among themselves from these facts we are led to think that all these also are under one Controller in the shape of God".
If what is meant to be proved is that all these Beings are controlled by God, then the Reason put forward is 'Inconclusive'; as there is no valid reason for precluding the contrary conclusion; specially as no Invariable Concomitance is admitted. The Corroborative Instance also is found to be devoid of the Probandum-If from the mere fact of there being a Controller, it is meant to prove that the Control is actually there, then the argument is futile; As we also accept the fact that the Enlightened One (Buddha), who was the crest-jewel of the entire universe, did actually control the entire world, through His mercy; by virtue of which all good men of the present day also attain prosperity and Ultimate Good.