118 Notes on Gaudapada-Karika The accepted order between कार्य and कारण is that कारण comes first and afterwards. Kārikā 16 above also refers to this. Gaudapāda says that the wise philosophers having considered carefully all the points involved in कार्यकारणभाव, and the various alternative theories adumbrated, have come to the conclusion that No. I is to be rejected on the ground of its of the अशक्ति, and the अपरिज्ञान of any संबन्ध between कार्य and कारण. No. 2 is frivolous and beneath consideration. No. 3 is to be rejected, because there is no ground to ascertain which comes first, of the two कार्य and कारण(and no दृष्टान्त to corroborate it). No. 4 goes against अनुभव. Thus No. 5 which says that there is अजाति, is alone the correct theory. Prof. Vidhuśekhara says that by बुद्धैः, we should understand the Buddhists'. The expression seems to have been used in the sense of तत्त्वदर्शिभिः (see Introduction ). In IV. 42, we have जातिस्तु देशिता बुद्धैः and in IV, 54, एवं हेतुफलाजातिं प्रविशन्ति मनीषिणः। so that by मनीषिण, बुद्धा, Gaudapāda probably refers to 'wise philosophers' in general. ( 20 ) The objector says that it was not fair on the part of Gaudapada to brush aside his theory of mutual कार्यकारणभाव ( कार्य producing कारण and कारण producing कार्य ) as frivolous by asking how a son can beget the father ( Kärikā 15 ); the matter should not be treated in that light-hearted manner. The बीजाङ्कुरन्याय correctly represents his position ( बीज produces अङ्कुर and अङ्कुर pro- duces बीज), Why should mutualकार्यकीरणभाव be objected to ? Every body accepts the बीजाङ्कुरन्याय as authoritative. Gaudapāda says in reply:.- We अजातिवादिन्s can not accept the बीजाङ्कुर दृष्टान्त. You have yet to prove to us how the कार्यकारणभाव exists between बीज and अङ्कुर. The दृष्टांत is not सिद्ध, it is still साध्य. Again, strictly speaking, it is wrong to regard बीजाङ्कुर proving अनादित्व as well. It is generally held that
