________________
EXAMINATION OF SAMAVÄYA' (INHERENCE, SUBSISTENCE).
455
TEXTS (835-839),
IF THERE WERE ONE AND THE SAME INHERENCE IN ALL THINGS, THEN
THE NOTION OF CLOTH' SHOULD APPEAR IN THE POTSTERD ALSO; IT WOULD ALSO FOLLOW THAT THE UNIVERSAL Cow' SUBSISTS IN THE ELEPHANT ALSO; SO THAT THE ELEPHANT ALSO SHOULD HAVE THE FORM OF THE Cow, JUST LIKE THE Variegated Cow.- THE NOTION THAT THE CLOTH SUBSISTS IN THE YARNS' IS BASED UPON INHERENCE; THIS SAME INHERENCE BEING PRESENT IN TH» POTSHERDS ALSO, WHY IS IT THAT THERE IS NO SUCH NOTION AS THAT
THE CLOTH SUBSISTS IN THE POTSHERDS' ?-IF IT BE URGED THAT THIS IS SO FOR THE SIMPLE REASON THAT THE CLOTH DOES NOT SUBSIST IN THE POTSERDS, THEN THE ANSWER IS THAT IN THE YARNS ALSO, IT SUBSISTS ONLY BY INHERENOE ; IS THIS INHERENCE THEN NOT PRESENT IN THE POTSHERDS 1 IN FACT THE INHERENCE OF THE CLOTH IN THE YARNS MUST BE THE SAME AS THE INHERENCE OF THE CLOTH (READ pațasya' A00. TO COMM.) IN THE POTSKERDS; AND HENCE THERE COULD BE NO RESTRICTION IN THE NOTION AT ALL.-(835-839)
COMMENTARY.
If there were only one Inherence in all the Three Worlds, then, such notions also should appear as 'the Cloth in the Potsherds, and also that the Universal Cow' subsists in the House; and hence just as the notion of
Cow' appears in regard to the variegated Cow, so should it appear also in regard to the Elephant.
Then again, the notion that the Cloth subsists in the Yarns' has been explained as being due to the influence of Inherence; this Inherence of the Cloth is present in the Potsherds also; why then should there not be a similar notion - The Cloth in the Potsherds'-in regard to the Potsherds also ?
It might be argued that "inasmuch as the Cloth does not subsist in the Potsherds, the said notion does not appear."
This cannot be true. Because the notion that the Cloth subsists in the yarns is also said to be so only on the strength of Inherence; is not this same Inherence present in the Potsherds also-on account of which there could be no such notion as the Cloth subsists in the Potsherds' also, just as in the Yarns -As a matter of fact, that Inherence of the Cloth which is said to be present in the yarns should be the same as that of the Cloth in the Potsherds. Under the circumstances, wherefore should not there be an admixture of the notions of things and the consequent confusion)? For these reasons, there could be no restriction in the notion at all, and as a result of this, the relation of Substance, Quality and Action with their respective qualificationis-in the shape of the Universals Substance', 'Quality' and
