________________
EXAMINATION OF THE DOCTRINE OF THE PERMANENCE OF THINGS. 257
If it be held that the incomplete form of the thing (i.o, without the auxiliaries) is different from that of the complete form (along with the auxiliaries), then the answer is as follows: If the form of the thing as without the auxiliaries be held to be difierent from its form as with the auxiliaries, then it loses its permanence; as the form is nothing different from the thing itself.
Tlms, even if the action of the cause be dependent upon auxiliaries, it is not possible for the Permanent Thing to have any successive fruitful activity.-(412-413)
The following Text shows that even simultaneous action is not possible -
TEXT (413).
As TOR simultaneity, THAT IS NOT FAVOURED (BY THE OTHER PARTY AT ALL); As TAR EFFECTS ARE ACTUALLY FOUND TO
APPEAR IN SUOCESSION.-(413)
COMMENTARY Even the other party do not favour the idea of the effects of the Permanent Thing being simultaneous. For instance, the following are described as the effects of Permanent Things : (a) Pleasure, Pain and the Rest-of the Soul; (6) Sound-of Ākāsła ; (c) the successive cognitions-of the Mind ; (d) the gross substances, from the Diad onwards-of the Atoms; (e) all products-of Time, Space, God and so forth. And in the case of all these effects it is clearly perceived that they appear in succession.-(413)
What is meant is that the theory of simultaneity is contrary to perceived facts, and also contrary to the opponent's own doctrines.
The author now proceeds to show that it is contrary to Inference also:
TEXT (414).
IT THE THING POSSESSED OF THE CAUSAL POTENCY DISAPPEARS, AFTER HAVING BROUGHT ABOUT ALL ITS EFFECTS SIMULTANEOUSLY, THEN ITS momentarine88 BECOMES
ESTABLISHED.-(414)
COMMENTARY
That is, does the nature of the thing consisting in its capacity for effective action disappear, after having brought about all the effects simultaneously
17
