पृष्ठम्:विशिष्टाद्वैतसिद्धिः.djvu/७०

one should seriously think how could there be evon a bare appearance in the void. Appearance itself is im. possible not to speak of one to whorn the appearance occurs and of that which appears. Appearance 1mplies these two. (Vithout these two there could be no appearance According to another school ev_ry thing is momen tary. A thing exists only for a woment. In tihe next moment the thing automatically perishes and becomes noa-existent. Vhat we sce in the next moment is not the same thing as ex:sted in the first moment, but a new one but very closely similar to it . This end of things in the next moment is called the uncognised or unobserved end. When the pot is brrken or the cloth is burnt that end of the n is their cognised or observed end. This view also is unacceptable. There is no reason which will compel us to accept the uncognised end of things and a new thing coming into existence without a cause. aginst our well established experiः ence of their continued existence The view of Vaiseshika philosophers-asatkaryavada has been already explained. Though it accepts an exist ing thing as the naterial cause of the effects, still hold. ing that the effects are quite distinct and separate from the material, it has to face the difficulty in explaining how a new substance separate from its material cause can come into existent. Uddalak indicates that rejection of all these and similar wrong views is meant by "alonc in his statement : ‘‘The existent alone was this at first.१9