________________
LOKÄYATA-MATERIALISM.
893
Or, accept pure Materialism * ;-this indicates the Lokayata-Sūtra* There is no one related to the other world; hence there can be no other world':-(1869-1871)
The following Texts answer the above arguments (of the Materialist):
TEXTS (1872-1877).
As REGARDS THE OTHER WORLD ', THERE IS NO SUCH OTHER WORLD',
APART FROM THE CHAIN OF Causes and Effects, IN THE FORM OF Cognition AND THE REST'. WHAT IS SPOKEN OF AS THE OTHER WORLD' OR 'THIS WORLD', THAT IS ONLY BY WAY OF A CERTAIN LIMIT PLACED UPON THE SAID CHATN' WHICH IS BEGINNINGLESS AND ENDLESS. WE REGARD IT TO BE THUS, IN THE SAME WAY AS PEOPLE ADDICTED TO THE PLEASURES OF THE PERCEPTIBLE ONLY ASSUME THE
OTHER WORLD TO CONSIST IN SOME OTHER PART OF THE COUNTRY.IF WHAT YOU ARE DENYING IS THE OTHER WORLD 'DIFFERENT FROM THOSE JUST MENTIONED, THEN THE ATTEMPT TO PROVE THAT DENIAL IS FUTILE ; AS THERE IS NO DISPUTE (BETWEEN US) REGARDING THE NON-EXISTENCE OF SUCH OTHER WORLD'Objection-"THE Chain BEING A NON-ENTITY, IT CANNOT HAVE DIFFERENT STATES ; HOW THEN CAN THE OTHER WORLD' CONSISTING OF THESE, BE ANYTHING real ?"-Answer—THERE IS NOTHING IN THIS; WHAT ARE DENOTED BY THE TERMCHAIN' ARE THE members of the chain, SPOKEN OF COLLECTIVELY BY THAT TERM FOR THE SAKE OF BREVITY; - JUST LIKE SUCH TERMS AS 'FOREST ' AND THE LIKE.-(1872-1877)
COMMENTARY. What is the other world' which you are denying? Is it something different from the Chain of causes and effects, consisting of Cognition and the other four Phases' (Skandhas)? Or is it this same Chain ?
The former cannot be right; as no such other world' has been admitted. In fact, there is nothing apart from the Chain of Causes and Effects, in the shape of Cognition and the rest, which could be accepted. What is actually regarded as the other world', or this world', or the previous world ',-is only by way of a certain limit,-in the form of a hundred years or so-placed upon the said Chain of Cognition, etc., which is without beginning and without end. This is exactly as you (Materialists), who are addicted to merely perceptible pleasures, apply the name other world'
*[This use of "nästikata' is to be noted; as it affords another indication of the truth that indstika' is not the same as Atheist'; 'nästikata', as we find here, is the view that denies the other world. This is in agreement with the View * of Vätsyāyana, who also sums up the Nästika' view in the words. Nästi atmă nästi paralokal. There is no Soul, there is no other world.')