Verse 507-508

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

क्षित्यादीनामवैशिष्ट्ये बीजाङ्कुरलतादिषु ।
न भेदो युक्त ऐकात्म्यात्तदा सिद्धा निरन्वया ॥ ५०७ ॥
तस्मात्कर्मफलादीनां भावाभावप्रसिद्धये ।
कार्यकारणतासिद्धौ यत्नः कार्यः परैरलम् ॥ ५०८ ॥

kṣityādīnāmavaiśiṣṭye bījāṅkuralatādiṣu |
na bhedo yukta aikātmyāttadā siddhā niranvayā || 507 ||
tasmātkarmaphalādīnāṃ bhāvābhāvaprasiddhaye |
kāryakāraṇatāsiddhau yatnaḥ kāryaḥ parairalam || 508 ||

If the elements of earth and the rest in the seed—sprout—creeper and so forth are not different,—then there can be no difference among them; as, in that case, all of them would be of the same nature. hence it must be admitted that there is no continuity in this case.

For these reasons, for the purpose of establishing the existence of ‘action and re-action’, the superior philosophers should put forth an effort to prove the relation of ‘cause and effect’;—and for the purpose of establishing the non-existence of ‘action and reaction’, the other philosophers should put forth an effort to disprove the relation of ‘cause and effect’.—(507-508)

 

Kamalaśīla’s commentary (tattvasaṃgrahapañjikā):

The following might be urged by the Opponent:—“Continuity is certainly present in the case of the Seed and such things; as has been declared by Uddyotakara:—What happens in the case of the Seed and Sprout is that the components of the Seed relinquish their previous formation and become arranged in a different formation,—when they have taken this formation, the Earth-element in it becoming mingled with the water-element, and heated by the Fire-element, produces a substance in the shape of the Sap; and this Sap, along with the previous components assumes the form of the Sprout. Such being the case, how can it be true that there is not the slightest trace of continuity?”

The answer to this is provided in the following—[see verses 507-508 above]

The sense of this is as follows:—If the Earth and other elements present in the later formation continue without surrendering their previous forms,—then there can be no surrendering of the previous formation and the assuming of the later formation; because both the formations would be exactly of the same nature as before; so that there would be no difference among the Seed, the Sprout, and the Creeper,—all being of the same nature.—In case you admit of difference among the Seed, etc., then, as there would always be the abandoning of the preceding form, it must be admitted that the Earth and other elements also abandon their own respective formations and assume other formations. Otherwise, there would be no difference at all; as already explained. Thus there being an appearance of several forms, one after the other, where would there be any ‘continuity’?

Inasmuch as on the proving of the true character of the causal relation, all such notions as the relation between Action and its Result become explicable,—and on the disproving of it, the said notions become dispelled,—for the purpose of determining the existence of Actions and their Results, etc.,—efforts should be put forth for the proving of the Causal Relation,—by the superior philosophers,—i.e. by the Buddhists, who are ‘Superior philosophers’ on account of their being followers of the best doctrines. And for the purpose of disproving the same notions, effort should be put forth by other philosophers,—i.e. the followers of other philosophical doctrines.

The term ‘Kāryakāraṇatāsiddhau” has been construed twice over,—the last term in one case being ‘asiddhau’.

[The latter assertion would appear to be in the nature of a taunt].—(507-508)