365bet娱乐

Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation of Text 20:

啶�啷冟ぅ啶苦さ啷嵿く啶距う啷�啶ㄠぞ啶� 啶ㄠさ啶距え啶距ぎ啶�啶� 啶︵�嵿ぐ啶掂�嵿く啶む�嵿さ啶�啷嬥�椸�� 啶膏�嵿さ啶距い啷嵿ぎ啶ㄠ�嵿く啶距ぐ啶�啷嵿き啶曕い啷嵿さ啶� 啶椸�佮ぃ啶掂い啷嵿い啷嵿さ啶� 啶曕ぞ啶班�嵿く啶曕ぞ啶班ぃ啶掂た啶班�嬥ぇ啶苦い啷嵿さ啶�啶ㄠ�嵿い啷嵿く啶掂た啶多�囙し啶掂い啷嵿い啷嵿さ啶�啷� 啷� 啷ㄠウ 啷�

p峁泃hivy膩d墨n膩峁� nav膩n膩mapi dravyatvayoga岣� sv膩tmany膩rambhakatva峁� gu峁嘺vattva峁� k膩ryak膩ra峁嘺virodhitvamantyavi艣e峁�avattvam || 20 ||

Text (20):鈥�All the nine, Earth and the rest, have the character of鈥�(1) belonging to the class 鈥�Substance,鈥� (2) self-productiveness or bringing about effects in themselves, (3) having qualities, (4) being not destructible by their causes and effects, and (5) being connected with ultimate Individualities.鈥�(I-i-9, 10, 12, 15, 18, 5; X-ii-1, 2.)

Commentary: The 狈测腻测补办补苍诲补濒墨 of 艢谤墨诲丑补谤补.

(English rendering of 艢谤墨诲丑补谤补鈥檚 commentary called 狈测腻测补办补苍诲补濒墨 or 狈测腻测补办补峁囜笉补濒墨 from the 10th century)

The anther now proceeds to point out the points of similarity among the substances.

It is Earth &c. alone that have a connection with the generic class 鈥楽ubstance.鈥� The particle 鈥�api鈥� shows that all the nine Substances have this character. This qualification also serves as the character differentiating the category of Substance from the other categories, and it also shows the actual denotation of the word 鈥楽ubstance.鈥�

Objection: 鈥溾��Dravyatvayoga鈥� (Connection with the class 鈥榮ubstance鈥�) means 鈥�inherence in the class substance鈥�; and in as much as this inherence belongs to all the five categories (of Substance, Quality, Action, Generality and Individuality), how could it serve as the differentia of Substances alone?鈥� To this, some people make the following reply: Though Inherence in all places, is one and the same, yet in as much as in the case in question, it is qualified by the class 鈥榮ubstance,鈥� it serves as the differentia of Substance. As for instance, we find that in the case of 膧办腻艣补, which is one and all pervading, different functions are attributed to it, as conditioned by the limitations of the Ear and the like.

But both the question and the reply given are equally unsatisfactory. The 鈥榗onnection鈥� (of the class Substance) is not the differentia of Substance, in the same way as 膧办腻艣补 is of the Ear; in fact it is the class 鈥楽ubstance鈥� (Dravyatva) which is the differentia; and the word 鈥�yoga鈥� (connection) has been added simply because the class, when unconnected, could not serve as the differentia; and all that is meant by this is that the existence (or presence) of the character (鈥榮ubstance鈥�) in the object (substance) is pointed out. Thus then the differentiation indicated would be thus expressed: 鈥楾he Earth and the rest differ from other things, because they belong to the class Substance,鈥攖hose that do not differ from those things are not found to belong to that class,鈥�e.g. Colour etc. Hence we conclude that both the objection and the reply are equally untenable.

The author points out another similarity among the substances: Bringing about effects within themselves鈥攊.e. producing such effects as inhere in themselves.

Having Qualities鈥�i.e. being related to qualities.

These last two characteristic are the points of dissimilarity between Substance and Quality etc. as they are not found anywhere else except in substances.

Being not destructible by their causes and effects,鈥攊n the case of Qualities we find that the first sound is destroyed by the second sound; sometimes it is destroyed by the cause e.g. the last sound by the last but one sound; Action too is sometimes destroyed by an effect,鈥�e.g. (motion is destroyed) by a subsequent contact with something else; Substances however are not thus destroyed, either by their cause or by their effect; and hence they are spoken of as not destructible by their causes a峁囜笉 effects. As for the eternal substances, there is no cause; nor is there any destruction; hence for these there naturally is no destruction by the cause; and as for the transient substances, though for these, both cause and destruction are possible, yet their destruction is not by their cause, but by something altogether apart from themselves.

Note:

We may regard this Text as supplying the Pra艣astap膩da鈥檚 definition of 鈥楽ubstance.鈥�

Not destructible by causes and effects鈥�

In the case of Qualities, of sound for instance, we find that when one sound produces another it is destroyed by this latter; and in the case of Action also we find that when it brings about its effect in the shape of the contact of its substratum with another point in space, it is destroyed by this contact. Substances on the other hand are never destroyed by any of their effects or causes; whenever they are destroyed, their destruction is due to the destruction of their causes.鈥�碍颈谤补峁嚹乿补濒墨 辫谤补办腻艣补.

鈥�骋耻峁嘺惫补迟迟惫补鈥欌�擶estern philosophers have also defined 鈥楽ubstance鈥� as 鈥渢he existence to which qualities belong.鈥� Aristotle defines it as the substratum. Says Locke鈥斺�淭he idea to which we give the general name Substance, being nothing but the supposed and unknown support of these qualities we find existing which we imagine cannot subsist........without something to support hem, we call that support Substantia. (Essay鈥擨滨-虫虫颈颈颈-2).

Berkeley denies the existence of any such support or substratum for qualities which, being mere sensations, require no other support than the mind that perceives them. Kant admits the validity of this argument; but while denying the notion of Substance as the substratum of qualities, he regarded it to be necessary as a category of thought, providing for the unity of the qualities themselves, he proves its existence as one of those Categories without which no experience would be possible.

The Scottish Philosophers reassert the dual Substance of Descartes, and bold the existence of a Spiritual and Material Substance The 痴补颈艣别峁�i办补蝉, rightly regarding the Soul as a Substance鈥攁 substratum of qualities鈥攁ppear to be the originators of this dual conception of Substance.