________________
OTHER FORMS AND MEANS OF KNOWLEDGE.
819
and also incapable of that effective action which can be accomplished by others ; hence the Probans based upon the capability for effective action cannot be admissible ; because the thing is not admitted as capable of efficient action, in regard to such action as can be accomplished by others. Nor is there any contradiction between existence and non-existence', as the two are in reference to distinct aspects of the thing; for instance, the thing is called 'existent' in reference to such effective action as can be accomplished by itself, and that same thing-not another-is called 'non-existent', in reference to such action as can be accomplished by others; there would have been contradiction' if it had been called 'non-existent' also in reference to the action accomplished by itself."
The answer to this is as follows--As a matter of fact, etc. etc.';-That same thing which is capable of the action that can be accomplished by itself, is 'incapable of that which can be accomplished by others; and it is not any other thing. Things do not differ through difference in their relatives or through difference in words ;-because the thing is impartite.
Tat stands for tasmat', 'for these reasons':--For these reasons, the dual character can never belong to the same thing.
If it be held that," the aspect that is incapable of such action as can be accomplished by others is different from that which is capable of effective action". This is what is introduced by the words If it is something else, etc. etc.?.
The answer to this is that there are two things ;--that which is capable of effective action is one thing, and that which is incapable is the second thing ; so that in saying what you have said, you have asserted the existence of two things, and not the dual aspect of one and the same thing. (1675-1677)
The following text points out defects in the third definition of Negation' put forward-that it consists merely in the absence of Means of Cognition.
TEXT (1678).
THE IDEA OF NEGATION' BEING AN ENTITY HAVING BEEN PREVIOUSLY
ACCEPTED, WHY IS IT DESCRIBED TO BE featureless ?-(1678)
COMMENTARY.
* Previously accepted'-in the assertion that "Negation consists in the non-modification of the Soul or in the cognition of something else (Text 1649).
Featureless'.-It has been asserted (by Kumarila, see under Text 1657) that-“Just as the cognisable Object is negative, so should the Means of cognition also be understood to be "; from which it is clear that the Means or Form of Cognition consists in the apprehension of the Object; hence it cannot be right to attribute the character of 'Means or Form of Cognition