205-
NOTES
or blue " ; of this usage the cause is the rlilation between the colour and the cloth, an indirect relation of inherence in that (stuff) which is in conjunction (with the cloth). 419. The relation here is not as simple a.~ that between cloth and blueness ; for though the movements are inherent in the sun, there is no direct conjunction between the sun and the things on earth; hence there is not the relation of smilyuktasamavaya. The four elements, ether etc., belong to the earth and establish no contact with the sun; Akas•a cannot fulfil this function since that too has a special quality, sound, and is in this respect on a par with the other elements ; further, being one and indivisible, it could equally link the sun with all things without distinction. Hence some other substance has to be postulated linking the objects of this earth to the sun in which movements are inherent ; hence the description of the relation as satityuktasamavaya. 420. Non-existences are not cognised with anything directly or indirectly; hence there would be no empirical usage of contemporaneity etc.; but there is. 424. This explanation follows the Advaitin's view of a single Akas•a, being defined by objects and having the properties of the latter superimposed thereon. The position really acceptable to the Advaitin is the next one, where it is claimed that imperceptibility attaches only to Aths•i11 (Mahakas•a), not to particular localities which are parts thereof. 425. The syllogism about sound establishes the defect of counter-probans (satpratipak~jatva) in respect of the original syllogism. The argument by elimination is shown similarly to be unsound by the second syllogism about touch etc. 431. The alternatives are: does the absence of sublating cognition relllte ,to the cogniser himself or to other persons ? On the first, ther~ is the possibility of sublation arising later. Another person's ignorance of sublation cannot validate my cognition. That • no tOne is aware of a sublater terrp is impossible to establish in any
•
