________________
RELATION BETWEEN ACTIONS AND THEIR RESULTS.
305
That to which the operation belongs ', - becomes the Cause, by reason of the fact of the Effect appearing only when it is there 'Such is the con. Struction of the sentence.
The Thing itself',-i.e. the Thing by itself, without any peculiar form of activity or operation, may be regarded as the Cause':-(522)
Question "What is the peculiarity in this latter view that it is said to be 'far better?
Answer:
TEXT (523) As A MATTER OF FACT, IT IS ON THE existence OF THE SEED ITSELF THAT THE SPROUT IS SEEN TO APPEAR ; ON THE OTHER HAND, NOTHING IS SEEN AS COMING INTO EXISTENCE ON THE EXISTENCE
OF AN OPERATION :-(523)
COMMENTARY.
On the existence',-1.e. on mere existence; i.e, on the existence of the Thing—the seed—itself, devoid of any other operation (or activity).This establishes the fact of the Effect being positively and negatively concomitant with the Thing itself, and not with the Operation.-(523)
Says tho Opponent "Even thongh the concomitance of the Effect with an Operation is not admitted, yet the Operation can have the causal character ?
Answer:
TEXT (524).
IF YOU ASSUME TEE 'CAUSAL CHARACTER OF THE OPERATION WHEN ITS POTEXOY (TOWARDS THE EFFECT) HAS NOT BEEN PERCEIVED,
THEN WHY DO YOU NOT ASSUME THE SAME OF SOMETHING ELSE ALSO ? OR, WHAT DISTINGUISHING FEATURE DO YOU FIND IN THE OPERATION WHICH IS NOT FOUND IN THAT OTHER
THING !-(524)
COMMENTARY.
Having ussurned the Operation to be the Cause, you will have to assume some other thing also as the Cause; because this letter would not be different from the Operation, as both would be equally such as having their potency not perceived ;-and so on there would be an infinite regress (of asswned Causes).-If no other Cause (than the Operation) is assumed, on the ground of there being no basis for it, then, the assumption of the Operation also may not be there ; as the baselessness' would be equal in both cases.
20
