________________ 198 WILHELM HALBTASS has already been emphasized in our introductory remarks--sc. the historical role of this 'ontological theory as an important, stimulating and truly catalytical target of criticism?6. * According to Mallavadin's Dvadasaranayacakra, as presented by Simhasuri, it seems that Prasastapada's (= Prasastamati's) lost Tika on a Vaibesikabhasya (by Atreya !) contained more detailed discussions of 'ontological' questions, esp. of the concept of sattasambandha; see the extracts from Mallavadin's work in: VS' 147-152. Mallavidin explains Prasastapada's understanding of the formula nisthasambandhayor ekaka. latvdt (also quoted by Vyomasiva, cf. above, n. 65) as follows: siddhasya vastunah sakaranaih sattayd ca sambandha iti prdeastamato 'bhiprdyah (loc. cit. 162). - The question to what extent Prasastapada's 'ontology' may have been prepared during the somewhat obscure period between VS and PB, which was excluded from the present, more systematically oriented sketch, will be taken up in the projected monograph, referred to in n. 31.
