________________
[ 169 )
cally known as pretabhāva popularly known as transmigration. This is a natural result of the karma on the part of the mundane soul. In ancient India some of the opponents of the doctrine of karma used to point out that karma as a logical assumption was unjustifiable. According to them in so far as the human efforts are found to be fruitless, no action on the part of man should be admitted as valid.? This is evidently the view of the some extreme Pāśupatas who were believers in the supreme efficiency of the Divine Principle without any reference to the human action. The author of the Nyaya sutra objected to this doctrine and pointed out that though Isvara may be rational antecedent of the origin of the human experiences, he cannot produce them independently without any consideration of the human effort. Hence the Nyāya sūtra says that there is no fruit in absence of human efforts. The idea is that the experience of pleasure and pain is the direct result of human effort but the ultimate causal efficiency lies in God Who causes the man to perform the action. Vátsyāyana says that karma has to be admitted as the logical antecedent of the experience of pleasure and pain though it is true that the ultimate causal principle, so far as the origin of the pleasure and pain effect is concerned is the specific karma of the agent. This karma may be dharma when reproduces pleasure or it may be adharma which produces pain or suffering. Vátsyāyana4 points it out in his Nyāyabhāşya.
This view of Nyāyasútra and its com nentator is supported by Udyotakara in his Nyāyavārttika who points out that Isvara independently of human efforts produces no result. As in that case we shall be constrained to admit the causality, of God independently of karma which is not possible. To sum up, Gautama
1. Nyāya Sūtra IV. 1. 19. 2. Nyāya Sūtra IV. 1. 20. 3. Nyāya Bhāşya Iv. 1. 21. 4. Nyāya Bhāşya IV. 1, 21. 5. Nyāya Värttika 1v. 1, 21.
.
.
