________________
GURUDEVA SMRITI GRANTHA flourish. Entities make use of the virtual action (upakara) done to them by other entities, and the action is called virtual on account of the limitation referred to above, This is the only manner in which the entities can help or hinder the functions of other entities. So our conclusion is this respect is that every entity has its existence (which is its non-relational side) to make relationism possible within the limit of mutual non-transformation of substances and attributes.
This prescription of a limit to the process of causation has led some thinkers to believe that the theory of virtual action among different substances is a pseudoconcept By this they mean that we perceive entities as helping or hindering the functions of other entities, but actually speaking every entity is solely responsible for its functions We must distinguish between the sets of entities, one of which shows such a relation with some entity while the other does not Let us take an example. According to the Jaipa conception a soul does not accept virtual action of the karma-matter lying unbound with it or bound with other souls, it accepts the virtual action of that karma-matter alone which is bound with it. The same medicine given under different conditions shows different results. The capacity to yield different results is something which gets transformed in different settings, or the prescription of different belping conditions for its use is futile. In a similar way all entities are not seen to establish a relation of causation with an entity. Now if causation is simply a pseudo-concept, both the sets of entities must ineffective to the entity under consideration. This very difference is suggestive of the efficacy and potency of vartual action. To hold that causation is possible only when there is mutual transformation of substances and attributes of the causes 18 a piece of unsound reasoning, as nature refuses to admit such a possibility. To view an entity as self centred 1.e as in itself and divorced from all its relations is only a way of approach to reality and can give us only its one sided picture. This does not mean that such viewing of reality is false, but we must admit that it is only a partial comprehension of reality and is based on abstracted process of comprehension.
This position may again be interpreted as leading to perfect determinism of entities by themselves and their setting But following the true nature of world dynamism one will not find difficulty in ascertaing the elements of determinism and indeterminism in it. We have already quoted the view that self-determinism is not very much incompatible with indeterminism. The recognition of entities to bring about relationism is the undetermined aspect of the world process. To the extent to which these entities admit the virtual action done to them by other entities they are determined Determinism and indeterminism are interwoven in the very texture of a real Every real smells out determinism and indeterminism simultaneouly. It is upto the obserier which smell he should prefer, but a comprehensive view of an
2A
