Indian Logic Part 01

Author(s): Nagin J Shah
Publisher: Sanskrit Sanskriti Granthmala

Page 96

PRAMĀNA ARTHAPATTI AND ABHĀVA
87
requires a cause like lump-of-clay ete.59 The Buddhist pleads that the stick cruse; not destruction of the jar but production of the potsherds; Jayanta retorts that even in that case the stick must cause destruction of the capacity-to-produce-jar (for otherwise, the jar must be seen to exist alongside the potsherds). 6 0 The Buddhist pleads that the jar possesses the capacity to produce both jar and potsherds; Jayanta retort; that even in that case the services of the stick are after all required (for otherwise both jar and potsherds should be seen to exist there from the very beginning or potsherds should not be seen to exist there even after the stick has been applied).61 The Buddhist pleads that the jar possesses the capacity to produce potsherds; Jayanta retorts that in that case the role of the stick remains enigmatic (for the fact is that the jar is replaced by potsherds never except after the stick has been applied).62 The Buddhist pleads that after the stick has been applied the jar ceases to be there; Jayanta retorts that the statement “jar ceases to be there' is absolutely equivalent to the statement 'absence-of-jar has come about'. 6 3 The Buddhist protests: 'At that time nothing happens to the jar, what happens is that the jar is not there'; Jayant& retorts: "To say that the jar is not there is to say that the absence-of-jar is there”. 64 The Buddhist denies the validity of the equation in question; Jayanta retorts: "In the statement 'the jar is not there' there occurs the word jar' and the word 'not'; we know what the former word means the latter word means "absence' 65 Here again the crux of the controversy lies in the circumstance that according to the Buddhist a causal relationship obtains only between independent things, not between their features positive or otherwise, while according to Jayanta it might obtain between all sorts of things and all sorts of features-of-a-thing. Thus when a stick applied to a jar breaks it into potsherds there does come into existnce 'absence of jar' according to the Buddhist as well as Jayanta; but the former will say that this "absence' is just a negative feature of the potsherds which are what has been really caused, the latter will say that this 'absence' is what has been really caused while the potsherds just happen to be the locus of this 'absence.” [The important question as to why according to the Buddhist the 'absence of a thing must come about as