Text 84: On the Production and Destruction of Colour &c.

Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation of Text 84:

पार्थिवपरमाणुरूपादीनां पाकजोत्पत्तिविधानम् । घटादेरामद्रव्यस्याग्निना सम्बद्धस्याग्न्यभिघातान्नोदनाद्वा तदारम्भकेष्वणुषु कर्माण्युत्पद्यन्ते तेभ्यो विभागाः विभागेभ्यः सम्योगविनाशाः सम्योगविनाशेभ्यश्च कार्यद्रव्यं विनश्यति । तस्मिन् विनष्टे स्वतन्त्रेषु परमाणुष्वग्निसम्योगादौष्ण्यापेक्षाच्छ्यामादीनां विनाशः पुनरन्यस्मादग्निसम्योगादौष्ण्यापेक्षात् पाकजा जायन्ते । तदनन्तरं भोगिनामदृष्तापेक्षादात्माणुसम्योगादुत्पन्नपाकजेष्वणुषु कर्मोत्पत्तौ तेषां परस्परसम्योगाद्द्व्यणुकादिक्रमेण कार्यद्रव्यमुत्पद्यते । तत्र च कारणगुणप्रक्रमेण रूपाद्युत्पत्तिः । न च कार्यद्रव्य एव रूपाद्युत्पत्तिर्विनाशो वा सम्भवति सर्वावयवेष्वन्तर्बहिश्च वर्तमानस्याग्निना व्याप्त्यभावादणुप्रवेशादपि च व्याप्तिर्न सम्भवति कार्यद्रव्यविनाशादिति ॥ ८४ ॥

pārthivaparamāṇurūpādīnāṃ pākajotpattividhānam | ghaṭāderāmadravyasyāgninā sambaddhasyāgnyabhighātānnodanādvā tadārambhakeṣvaṇuṣu karmāṇyutpadyante tebhyo vibhāgāḥ vibhāgebhyaḥ samyogavināśāḥ samyogavināśebhyaśca kāryadravyaṃ vinaśyati | tasmin vinaṣṭe svatantreṣu paramāṇuṣvagnisamyogādauṣṇyāpekṣācchyāmādīnāṃ vināśaḥ punaranyasmādagnisamyogādauṣṇyāpekṣāt pākajā jāyante | tadanantaraṃ bhogināmadṛṣtāpekṣādātmāṇusamyogādutpannapākajeṣvaṇuṣu karmotpattau teṣāṃ parasparasamyogāddvyaṇukādikrameṇa kāryadravyamutpadyate | tatra ca kāraṇaguṇaprakrameṇa rūpādyutpattiḥ | na ca kāryadravya eva rūpādyutpattirvināśo vā sambhavati sarvāvayaveṣvantarbahiśca vartamānasyāgninā vyāptyabhāvādaṇupraveśādapi ca vyāptirna sambhavati kāryadravyavināśāditi || 84 ||

Text (84).—The process whereby the colour &c. are produced in the atom of Earth by baking is as follows:—When the unbaked jar and such other things are put into contact with fire, the strokes of the fire, or the motion given rise to (by it) bring about certain actions among the atoms composing that jar.

These actions bring about disjunctions.—(VII-ii-10).

From these disjunctions proceed destructions of conjunctions.—(IX-i-2.)

These destructions of the conjunction of component atoms bring about the disruption of the composite substance (jar.) On the destruction of the composite substance, the dark colour of the atoms rent asunder becomes destroyed by the contact of fire by the aid of its heat.

Further contact of those same atoms with fire, aided by its heat, produces, in those atoms, the colour which is said to be produced by baking.—(VII-i-6.)

After this, the contact of the selves with these atoms, as aided by the adṛṣṭa (destiny) of the selves destined to experience (the effects of the jar), produces action in the atoms in which the colour has been produced by baking. This action brings about the conjunction of the atoms; and from this con junction proceed all the composite substances from the Diad downwards.

In these component substances, the qualities of Colour &c. are produced in accordance with like qualities in the cause (component atoms).—(VII-i-6, 7).

The destruction of the Colour &c., or their production, cannot take place in the composite substance itself; as (without disruption) the fire cannot pervade over the whole of the substance, over all its component particles inside and out. Nor would pervasion by fire be possible by its entering into the atoms; as this would mean the disruption or destruction of the component substance.—(IV-iii).

Commentary: The Nyāyakandalī of Śrīdhara.

(English rendering of Śrīdhara’s commentary called Nyāyakandalī or Nyāyakaṇḍalī from the 10th century)

The author now proceeds to explain the process by which the Colour &c. of the Earth-atom are produced and destroyed. Though the ‘Earth’ itself is nothing apart from the atoms, yet the atoms are called ‘pārthiva’ (of the earth), as compared with the composite earthy substances (which alone are here intended to be called ‘pṛthivī’, ‘Earth’); the expression ‘atom of Earth’ would thus be explained as the ‘atoms which are the cause of the Earth;’ and the author proceeds to explain the process whereby Colour &c. are produced in these atoms, by baking.

Objection:—“If such be the intention, then this would not “imply the presence of an intention to explain the process of the “destruction of certain colours—the dark colour of the unbaked jar for instance.”

Reply: This is not right. This destruction also is implied in the ‘process;’ as what the author does is to explain the process which consists in the destruction of one set of qualities and the production of another set, by baking.

The jar and such other things—the ‘other things’ being Earthenware cups and saucers and so forth.

The fire-contact produces certain actions in the component particles of the jar,—and not in what is only in temporary contact with it, such for instance, as the water contained in the clay. As the ‘component particles’ of the jar are the atoms, it is these latter that are the cause (substrate) of the actions produced by the fire-contact.

By the strokes of fire or by the motion &c.—The Earthatoms are struck by the fire, or are set in motion by it—as we shall explain under the section of ‘Action’ (Text, pp. 290-311.) Thence follow disjunctions; from disjunction, the destruction of conjunctions or contacts, from whence proceeds the destruction of the composite substance. That is to say, the actions set in among the atoms bring about disruption among them, which leads to the destruction of the diad and other composites. These being destroyed, the atoms are rent asunder, the dark colour is destroyed, and the red colour produced by baking.—that this is so is proved by the fact that in all cases colour &c., are found to be produced in a substance only when it is not hampered by its effects,—i.e. when it exists in its own positive form. This argument may be thus formally expressed:—‘The qualities of Colour &c. of the atoms are produced while they are in their non-composite state,—because they are such qualities as are produced,—like the colour of the yarns.’ That the former colour is destroyed is proved by the appearance of another colour; it being a well-recognised fact that a substance that already has one colour, cannot have another colour produced in itself; the argument being formally stated thus:—‘The red colour is not produced in substances which is already endowed with a colour, because it is a colour,—like the colour of the yarns.’ The destruction of the former colour of the atoms being thus proved, the fire-contact, which was the cause of that destruction, still persists; as it is only while this is present that the consequent destruction could take place; none else being possible. But from this it should not be inferred that what was the cause of the destruction of one colour is also the cause of the production of another colour; as in the case of the colour of the yarns, we find, as a matter of fact, that what produces the new colour is something entirely different from what destroyed the former colour. From this we conclude that the destruction of the colour of the atom is by something entirely different from what produces the other colour. The reasoning in support of this may be put in this form:—‘The destruction and production of the colour in the atom cannot be due to the same cause,—because they are such destruction and production of colour,—like the destruction and production of the colour in yarns.’

After this &c. The persons to experience are those persons who would experience the pleasure and pain due to the production of the jar; the ‘adṛṣṭa’ of those people are their merits and demerits; these aid the action of the conjunction of the atoms with the selves of these persons, in bringing about certain actions among the atoms in whom the fresh colour &c. have been produced by fire-contact. These actions bring about the conjunction or aggregation of the atoms; and from the aggregation of atoms is formed the Diad; by the aggregation of three Diads is formed the Triad; and so forth the composite substance, jar, is produced.

The colour &c. in this jar are produced in accordance with the colour &c. of the atoms composing it.—The colour of the two atoms producing the colour of the Diad; the colour of the two Diads the colour of the Triads and so on, is the colour &c. of the jar produced.

Number &c., are not produced by baking; as they are not of diverse character.

Objection: “We do not perceive any difference in the character of the various kinds of Touch either.”

Reply: True; but still it is by Inference that we ascertain the fact of Touch being produced by baking;—as we have shown in the section on ‘Earth:’

The conjunctive action in the atoms begins after the production of the qualities by baking, and not at the time of the destruction of the previous qualities; as it is only in a substance with colour that we find an action productive of another coloured substance; and hence the action of the atoms must be regarded as appearing only in coloured atoms,—because it is an action productive of a coloured thing,—like the action of the threads productive of such combinations as bring about the Cloth.

Question: “Why cannot you assume the fact of fire-contact bringing about the destruction and production of Colour &c., in the products themselves (and not in the constituent atoms)? For certainly in the case of the baking of the jar we distinctly see, when looking through a hole in the oven, that the jar remains the same; and even after the baking, it is recognised to be the same jar that had been put into the fire.”

Answer: Na ca &c. The author proceeds to prove this: Sarvāvayaveṣu &c. If the fire outside the object were to pervade over the object inhering as a whole in every one of its component parts,—then, in as much as there would be no contact pervading all over the object, there would be no certainty as to the projection or destruction of the products; and hence there would be no baking of the inner particles; it is with this view that the author has added—Sarvāvayaveṣu, etc.

Objection: “All composite substances being porous, even if the fire could not enter inside the object, it could pervade over its atoms.”

Reply: Aṇupraveśādapi &c. The atoms are not porous, (have no interstices), because they have no component parts; hence if the diad had interstices it would not be produced at all, as there could be no combination between the two atoms, if there were any interstice between them; and if the two atoms combine, then there could be no interstice between them. As it is only when two composite substances combine that there are interstices due to their combining in parts only; in the case of two non-composite substances, like two atoms, however, there could be no such thing. Then again, in a gross material substance we do not perceive any such interstices or pores; in the Triad alone there could than be such an interstice; and yet that too is not perceptible. Hence the assumption of the opponent proves to be much too complicated.

Thus then the jar having no interstice, the atoms of fire could not enter within these, until there were a disruption of the Earth-particles composing that jar.

In the out of a tangible object being struck by another tangible object, its component particles become disjoined, and in accordance with the process of disjunction &c., there appears the destruction of that Conjunction which keeps the object in its composite state; and on this there inevitably follows the destruction of that object. And hence whence could there be any manifestation of it, by the entrance of the atoms? In all products, there is no other destruction of its properties of Colour &c., save in the destruction of the substances to which they belong; nor is there any production of these save out of like properties in the material causes of those products. For this same reason, we do not hold the destruction and production of Colour to be due to the contact of the jar with fire. As the Colour &c., of the jar are destroyed by the destruction of the jar,—because they are such Colour &c., as belong to products,—like the Colour of the jar destroyed by a stroke of the stick; and similarly, the Colour &c., of the jar are produced from like qualities in the material cause of the jar,—because they are such Colour &c., as belong to products,—like the Colour &c., of the Cloth.

Then again, in the case of the jar we find that before baking its component particles are lose and disjointed,—and they become hardened after baking; nor is there coexistence possible, of looseness and hardness, like that of pressure and urging; as the two are mutual contradictions. Hence it must be admitted that the former composite object has been destroyed, and a new one produced in its place; and thus the previous substance having been destroyed, the new substance must be regarded as brought about by some cause. As for the baked jar being recognised to be the same as the unbaked one, this must be regarded as being due to their extreme similarity; just as in the case of the flame. Then as for the fact of the jar being always perceived as a complete whole, during the time that it is being baked,—this must be due to the fact of the jar being destroyed gradually; that is to say, the jar is not a mere aggregate of atoms; and as such it is not destroyed all at once, as soon as there is a disruption of the atoms; as a matter of fact it is made up of atoms, through Triads and Diads &c.; and hence it is only after the numberless diads and triads have been destroyed, that the jar is destroyed; and hence so long as it has not been destroyed, there is a perception of it. Then again as the previous particles go on being destroyed, in their places there goon being produced other particles having the qualities produced by the baking; hence what we see during the time of baking, is the jar made up of baked and unbaked particles.

At the same time that the previous composite object becomes destroyed by the destruction of the component particles,—there is a production of new component particles; and the former composite object having been destroyed, there is a production of a fresh composite object; and thus there would be a restriction of the substratum of the new object. That is to say; as many are the component particles of the previous object, so many are the particles entering into the constitution of the resultant object; and the magnitude and number of particles in the latter are the same as those of the former.

The process involved in this may be thus traced in its detail:—the (1) destruction of the Diad, (2) the destruction of the Triad; (3) the destruction of the Dark Colour (of the unbaked jar), (4) the production, in the active atom, of a disruption due to disjunction, (5) the production of the fire-contact productive of the red Colour,—all this forming one point of time;—then (6) the destruction of the Triad, (7) the destruction of the product of the Triad, (8) the production of the disruption due to disjunction (9) the destruction of the conjunction, (10) the production of the fire-contact productive of the red Colour, (11) the production of the red Colour, and (12) the destruction of the fire-contact destructive of the Dark Colour,—these six forming another point of time;—then (13) there is the destruction of its product, (14) the destruction of the product of that product, (15) the production of the subsequent conjunction, (16) the production of the red Colour &c., (17) the destruction of the fire-contact destructive of the Dark Colour, (18) the appearance in another atom, of the action productive of another object,—these six constituting another point of time; (19) then the destruction of its product, (20) the destruction of the product of this product, (21) the production of the subsequent conjunction, (22) the destruction of the action, the disjunction and the disruption produced by this disjunction, (23) the production, in the second atom, of the disjunction from. Ākāśa, (24) the destruction of the conjunction with that,—these six forming one point of time;—(25) then the destruction of its product, (26) the destruction of the product of this product, (27) the production of the subsequent conjunction of one atom with another, (28) the production of the Diad,(29) the destruction of the disjunction and the action, these five forming another point of time;—(30) then the destruction of its product, (31) the destruction of the product of that product, (32) the production of the Diad, (33) the production of the Colour &c., of the Diad, (34) the destruction of the disjunction and the action, (35) at the next moment, the production in the Diad of qualities in accordance with the qualities of its constituent atoms.

The same process may be applied to all the Diads composing an object. In the production of the Triad &c., we need not take into consideration any actions or operations; as these are. produced from combinations born of conjunctions, by the following process: many atoms combine with one another at one and the same time; and thus the atom composing one Diad combines with that composing another Diad; and one Diad comes into contact with the atom composing another Diad; then there comes about the combination of two Diads, and so on.

All this we have explained as we have been taught, so far as we have been able to understand the process.