Tattva Sangraha Vol 1

Author(s): Kamlashila, Ganganatha Jha
Publisher: Oriental Research Institute Vadodra

Page 57

62
TATTVASANGRAHA CHAPTER 1.
From all this it follows that the reason put forward (by the Sikhya) -"Because of homogeneity"-is Inadmissible, improven':-(40)
Now the Author admits (for the sake of argument) that the Reuson (Homogeneity) is 'admissible', 'proved ', -and proceeds to show its invalidity, Inconclusiveness in the following:
TEXT (41),
EVEN THOUGH THE MANIFEST ' BE ACCEPTED AS CONSISTING OF THREE ATTRIBUTES": -PRIMORDIAL MATTER DOES NOT BECOME ESTABLISTED AS THE ONE ETERNAL CAUSE OF THAT (MANIPRST); BROAUSE THAT MANIFEST IS NOT IMBUED WITH
ANY SINGLE GENERIC CHARACTER.-(41)
COMMENTARY. Even if it be taken as proved that the Manifest' consists of the Three Attributes', yet that does not prove what the sankchya wishes-vis, that the Cause of that Manifest' is that which is called 'Primordial Matter'; that is to say, because the reason that has been put forward has not beon found to be concomitant with a Cause of that kind. For instance, what the Sankhya desires to prove is that the Cause of the Manifest' is one, consisting of the Three Attributes, eternal and all.pervading; as a matter of fact, with such a Cause, the invariable concomitance of the Reason has nowhere been perceived; nor is it necessary that the Cause must be of the same nature as the Effect is found to be ; because there is a clear difference between the Cause and its Effect. You hold that the Effect in the shape of the Manifest' is that which has such characteristics as having a Cause',
being non-eternal', 'non-pervasive' and so forth; and yet you do not hold the Cause of this Manifest) to have these characteristics. Hence your Reason (Premiss) is 'too wide', 'inconclusive'.
The Text next proceeds to show that the Reason put forward (by the Sankhya) is contradictory' also, inasmuch it entails the conception contrary to the nature of the particular Entity -As the one eternal Cause, etc. ;-that is to say, what is meant to be proved is the existonce of an Entity, which is one, sternal and made up of the Three Attributes, as the Cause of the Manifest'); and no such entity is established by the Reason put forward ; -in fact, what is established is something quite contrary to it."How so?"-Because that is not endowed, etc.-The particle hi' stands for because'; hence the meaning is that the Effect in the shape of the Manifest' is not recognised to be imbued with any such single generic character As consists of the Three Attributes and which forms the very essence of the
Manifest ',-"What is it then that is recognised ! "-The Manifest' is actually cognised as endowed with such qualities as multiplicity, noneternality and so forth. If the 'Manifest' were really imbued with any such generic character as that postulated by the other party, then the Cause also of that Manifest' would have to be recognised as possessed of that character. Inasmuch as, however, the Effect (in the shape of the Manifest ') is actually