आगमे विश्वासटिप्पन्यः

Original

जायमानश्च गन्धादिर्घटरूपे विनश्यति ।
तत्कार्यं नेष्यते यद्वत्तथा रूपान्तराण्यपि ॥ ४८६ ॥

jāyamānaśca gandhādirghaṭarūpe vinaśyati |
tatkāryaṃ neṣyate yadvattathā rūpāntarāṇyapi || 486 ||

“The odour and other qualities that appear after the destruction of the colour of the jar are not held to be the effect of this latter; in the same way the subsequent colours also (could not be regarded as the effect of the previous colour).”—(486)

Kamalaśīla

The following might be urged (by the Buddhist)—Even without any operation, the relation of ‘Cause and effect’ would be there on the basis of mere proximity.

The answer to this is supplied by the following—[see verse 486 above]

If the idea is that when one thing comes into existence after another, it must be the effect of this latter, then just as, after the ‘Colour-Moment’ subsisting in the Jar has ceased, the homogeneous Colour-moments that appear in it are regarded as the effects of the preceding Colour-moment,—so also the Odour and other properties that are produced in the same Jar would have to be regarded as the Effects of that same preceding Colour-moment And, yet, even though this immediate sequence is there, the Odour-moment is not held to be the effect of the preceding Colour-moment; because between material properties, there cannot be the same causal relation that there is between material substances themselves, because they appear in different ‘chains’ (or series). This is the opinion that our opponent himself holds.

‘In the same way the subsequent Colours also’;—that is to say, the homogeneous Colour-moments cannot be regarded as the effects of the previous Colour-moment, entirely on the ground of immediate sequence; as otherwise there would be an absurdity.—(486)