________________
TATTVASANGRAHA: CHAPTER IX.
TEXTS (483-484).
"AN ENTITY THAT HAS ITSELF NOT SECURED ITS EXISTENCE CAN NEVER BE THE CAUSE OF SOMETHING ELSE; NOR CAN THE DESTROYED ENTITY (BE A CAUSE); NOR CAN THE PRESENCE (OF THE PRESENT ENTITY) BE CAPABLE OF PRODUCING THE EFFECT. FURTHER, IF THE DESTRUCTION OF THE PREVIOUS MOMENT' BE HELD TO BE absolute, THEN THERE COULD BE NO PRODUCTION OF ANY SUBSEQUENT 'MOMENT',
288
AS ITS CAUSE WOULD NOT BE
THERE." (483-484)
COMMENTARY.
That thing is called 'future which has not yet secured its existence; -what has not secured its existence must be non-existent'; what is nonexistent must be devoid of all potentiality;-what is devoid of all potentiality cannot serve as the cause of anything else,-i.e. cannot serve as the cause of bringing about any other thing; because it is agreed on all sides that it is only a potential thing that can serve as a cause.
Similarly what has perished cannot serve as the cause of anything else, as it is devoid of all potentiality.
As for the Present thing, that has no continued existence, by virtue of which it could be capable of producing any effect.
Then again, if it is held that the preceding Moment' perishes absolutely, then there could be no producing of the subsequent 'Moment', as there would be no cause for such production.-(483-484)
The following argument might be urged (by the Buddhist):-Just as the rising and falling of the weighing scales come about simultaneously, so also would be the destruction of the Present Moment and the appearance of its effect; so that what is meant is that the subsequent Moment is brought about by the preceding Moment before the latter has been destroyed; and that the appearance of the later moment would not fail to have its cause.
The following Text supplies the answer to this argument :
TEXT (485).
EVEN IF THE DESTRUCTION AND PRODUCTION WERE SIMULTANEOUS, THERE WOULD NOT BE MUTUAL DEPENDENCE; SO THAT THERE COULD NOT BE THE RELATION OF *CAUSE AND
EFFECT, AS THERE WOULD BE NO HELP
RENDERED BY IT." (485)
COMMENTARY.
Even if the Destruction (of the first Moment) and the Production (of the second Moment) be assumed to be simultaneous, there would not be the
