Verse 524

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

अदृष्टशक्तेर्हेतुत्वे कल्प्यमानेऽपि नेष्यते ।
किमन्यस्यापि हेतुत्वं विशेषो वाऽस्य कस्ततः ॥ ५२४ ॥

adṛṣṭaśakterhetutve kalpyamāne'pi neṣyate |
kimanyasyāpi hetutvaṃ viśeṣo vā'sya kastataḥ || 524 ||

If you assume the ‘causal character’ of the operation when its potency (towards the effect) has not been perceived,—then why do you not assume the same of something else also? Or, what distinguishing feature do you find in the ‘operation’ which is not found in that other thing?—(524)

 

Kamalaśīla’s commentary (tattvasaṃgrahapañjikā):

Says the Opponent:—“Even though the concomitance of the Effect with an Operation is not admitted,—yet the Operation can have the causal character”.

Answer:—[see verse 524 above]

Having assumed the Operation to be the Cause, you will have to assume some other thing also as the Cause; because this latter would not be different from the ‘Operation’, as both would be equally such as having their potency not perceived and so on there would be an infinite regress (of assumed Causes).—If no other Cause (than the Operation) is assumed, on the ground of there being no basis for it, then, the assumption of the ‘Operation’ also may not be there; as the ‘baselessness’ would be equal in both cases.

Then again, this ‘Operation’ that is said to produce the Effect,—does it produce it through the medium of another Operation? Or by its mere existence? It could not be the former, as, in that case, the causal character should belong to that other Operation, not to the previous Operation; and for this later Operation also, there would be the need for another Operation, etc,—all which would be open to the same objection. And if that other Operation also would need a further Operation, then there would be an infinite regress.—(524)

If then, it be held that the Operation produces the Effect by its mere existence,—then, like this Operation, the Thing itself might produce the Effect by its mere existence; and the assuming of the ‘Operation’ would be entirely futile.—This is what is explained in the following—[see verse 525 next]