Verse 88-89

Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation by Ganganath Jha:

ये वा क्रमेण जायन्ते ते नैवेश्वरहेतुकाः ।
यथोक्तसाधनोद्भूता जडानां प्रत्यया इव ॥ ८८ ॥
तेषामपि तदुद्भूतौ विफला साधनाभिधा ।
नित्यत्वादचिकित्स्यस्य नैव सा सहकारिणी ॥ ८९ ॥

ye vā krameṇa jāyante te naiveśvarahetukāḥ |
yathoktasādhanodbhūtā jaḍānāṃ pratyayā iva || 88 ||
teṣāmapi tadudbhūtau viphalā sādhanābhidhā |
nityatvādacikitsyasya naiva sā sahakāriṇī || 89 ||

Things that are born consecutively cannot have cod for their cause,—just like the notions of foolish persons arising from the said reasonings (of the theist).—if those (notions) also are produced by cod, then the adducing of proofs (in support of them) should be useless; because of (his) eternality; and as he would be beyond remedy, the said statement could render no help.—(88-89)

 

Kamalaśīla’s commentary (tattvasaṃgrahapañjikā):

The following Text sets forth another argument (against Theism):—[see verse 88-89 above]

The ‘notions’—i.e. the definite conclusions—derived from such reasonings as ‘because characterised by a peculiar arrangement of component parts’ and the rest,—relating to the object sought to be proved,—appearing in the minds of those foolish persons who are keen on proving Cod as the Cause of the World.

Objection—“As a matter of fact, the said reasons have all been shown to be invalid and beset with fallacies that have been pointed out; and hence no conclusive notions could be derived from them, regarding what is desired to be proved; and under the circumstances, there could be no Corroborative Instance in support of the reasoning here set forth (by you).”

That is true; that is why the Text has used the term ‘foolish persons’; foolish people are not capable of discriminating the validity of Proofs, and hence they derive their notions from invalid premisses also,

“Even so, the Corroborative Instance would remain devoid of the Probandum; because ‘the notions of foolish persons’ also are accepted by us as having God for their efficient Cause.”

Answer—If these notions also, etc.—These notions,—i.e. the notions of foolish persons; if these also are held to be produced by Cod,—then the adducing of proofs should be useless; the putting forward of reasons would be entirely useless; i.e. because they would all be produced from Cod Himself.

“Cod would be the producer of the said notions, through the help of the statement of proofs,—and not by Himself alone; so that the said statement would not be useless.”

Answer—Became of His eternality;—if the statement of proofs served to remove God’s inefficient character and render it efficient,—then it could be helpful to Him; but inasmuch as God is eternal and hence His character cannot be liable to removal or production, He could not be helped by anything; so that the statement of the proof cannot be of any use to Him.—(88-89)