Syadvada Manjari

Author(s): Mallishenacharya, F W Thomas
Publisher: Motilal Banarasidas

Page 22

21
IV. The Vaiseșiaa doctrine of universality and particularity
therefrom. And being-different is being-other, and for that a complete distinction is indispensable.
If, however, we adopt an unequivocal difference of universality and particularity from the things denoted, then a duality of presentation in the shape of conformity and difference, relating to the single substance, would be unaccountable. And, if there is unequivocal difference, it follows that one or the other of them is non-existent. And there would be no use of the expressions 'universality' and 'particularity", because an entity is presented by its evidence always with an essential nature compounded of both universality and particularity: and the alternative of mutual independence (of the two) will be disposed of later). For this very reason he intimates by the action of tripping the ridiculousness of those disputants. For whoso accepts in one way an own-nature of something which is actually otherwise, and so communicates to others, is himself lost and destroys others; certainly no other than he is a vessel for ridicule. That is the meaning of the fourth verse.
8) see v. VIII, pp. 40 sqq.