________________
-1871]
TRANSLATION
37
torn and reduced to 'threads', it involves the action of being destroyed on the part of the cloth and that of being produced on the part of the threads or yarns; the identity of the cloth and the yarns would thus mean that the same thing is both destroyed and produced at the same time);-(b) there is notion and assertion of the cause and the effect being related (which means that the two members of the relationship are different); (c) the function of the useful purpose served by the cause is different from that served by the effect (e. g., the cloth serves the useful purpose of covering things, which purpose cannot be served by the yarns ]." These arguments, we say, cannot prove the difference between cause and effect; because all the said differences can be explained and reconciled by attributing the notions to the appearance and disappearance of certain factors: (a) For instance, the limbs of the tortoise disappear on entering its bɔdy and appear again on emerging from it; but for this, we cannot say that the limbs are either produced from, or destroyed by, the tortoise; in the same manner, the jar, the crown, and other things, which are only particular modifications of clay, gold and so forth, are said to be produced on emanating and appearing from these latter, and to be destroyed on entering them again (i. e., being formed into clay, etc.,) and disappearing. As a matter of fact, however, there can be no 'production' or birth for what is ‘non-existent', nor destruction for what is 'existent';-as has been declared by the revered Krşņadvaipāyana ( Vyāsa in the Bhagavadgitā, 2. 16 )—'There is no being for the non-existent, nor non-being for the existent.' -In the instance cited, the Tortoise is not different from its appearing and disappearing limbs; and similarly the jar, the crown and other products are not different from clay, gold and so forth.—b) The 'assertion' (of difference between the cloth and the yarns) implicit in such notions as 'This cloth is in (made up of) these yarns' is explicable, as being
