________________
49
many? In either case it cannot be one. For what is स्थूल cannot be in its nature one (स्थूलस्यैकस्वभावविरोधात् ). If the gross whole were one, when one part is coloured the whole would have to be supposed to be coloured, or if one part is covered the whole would be found to be covered ! ( यदि स्थूलमेकं स्यात् तदेकदशराग सर्वस्य रागः प्रसज्येत, एकदेशावरणे सर्वस्यावरणं भवेत् ) The other alternative, that the gross whole is many, is what you do not hold. For, you hold that one whole subsists in many parts ( अनेकत्वेऽभ्युगमविरोधः बहुष्वक्यवेष्वेकस्यैवायविनो वृत्तेर्भवद्भिरभ्युपगमात्-Panjika). Objection: If there is no अवयविन् , how can you speak of something (अवयविन्) being स्थूल and something ( अवयव ) सूक्ष्म ? (स्थूलसूक्ष्मादिव्यपदेशोवयव्यसत्त्वेऽनुपपन्नः ) Answer: the अवयवs come to be regarded as सूक्ष्म or स्थूल according as they are one or many. ( अवयवा एव तथा उप्तद्यमाना अल्यबहुतराः स्थूलसूक्ष्मादिव्यपदेशं लभन्ते-Panjika.)
p
पनिका. समेकीभावे--" सम् एकी भावे, अव् अपृथत्के, अय् गतौ. Derivation and mean4 ine of समवायः एकीभावेनापथगमनम्"-to be so united
be separable. Things which possess this property are called समवायिन-e. g. तन्तुs with respect to पट; they are the आधारभूतकारण of पट, while the latter is आधेयभूत-कार्य of the formers in other words, one rests indissolubly in the other. The Buddhist word for समवायिकारण is 'उपादानकारण' ( the same is the word of the Vedantin), and the Jaina calls it 'परिणामकारण.' तान वितानीभावे--when the threads are arranged as warp and woof. संयोगसंयोगिनोः etc. तन्तुसंयोग is something distinct from the threads and yet makes them into one 98. The aras beibg the समवायिकारण, the तन्तुसंयोग is the असमवायिकारण, (कार्येण सहकस्मिन्नर्थे समवेतत्वे सति कारणम्-See Tarkasaingraha and Dipika ). The weaver and his weaving machine are the निमित्तकारण. आत्मा सुखादीनां &c...आत्मन् is the समवायिकारण of its qualities, viz., सुख etc. आत्ममनःसंयोग is their असमवायिकारण and लक् चन्दन etc are their निमित्तकारण.
यथा वैशेषिकस्य etc. :-The Buddhist, unlike the Vaisesika, does not hold the doctrine of the three kinds of causes. According to him, there is one stream of consciousness, or rather series of consciousnesses ( fantasiala ), due to a group of antecedents which we call a cause, e.g. सक् चन्दन etc. of सुखविज्ञान,
