[Footnote 182: _I.e._, from the destruction of _apekshábuddhi_ follows the destruction of _dvitva_; but the other destructions previously described were followed by some production,--thus the knowledge of _dvitvatva_ arose from the destruction of _ekatvajñána_, &c. (cf. Siddh. Mukt., p. 107). I may remind the reader that in Hindu logic the counter-entity to the non-existence of a thing is the thing itself.] [Footnote 183: From the conjunction of fire is produced an action in the atoms of the jar; thence a separation of one atom from another; thence a destruction of the conjunction of atoms which made the black (or unbaked) jar; thence the destruction of the compound of two atoms.] [Footnote 184: _I.e._, a kind of initiative tendency.] [Footnote 185: These are explained at full length in the Siddhánta Muktávalí, pp. 104, 105. In the first series we have--1. the destruction of the _dvyaṇuka_ and simultaneously a disjunction from the old place produced by the disjunction (of the parts); 2. the destruction of the black colour in the _dvyaṇuka_, and the simultaneous destruction of the conjunction of the _dvyaṇuka_ with that place; 3. the production of the red colour in the atoms, and the simultaneous conjunction with another place; 4. the cessation of the action in the atom produced by the original conjunction of fire. The remaining 5-10 agree with the 4-9 above.] [Footnote 186: The Vaiśeshikas hold that when a jar is baked, the old black jar is _destroyed_, its several compounds of two atoms, &c., being destroyed; the action of the fire then produces the red colour in the separate atoms, and, joining these into new compounds, eventually produces a new red jar. The exceeding rapidity of the steps prevents the eye's detecting the change of the jars. The followers of the Nyáya maintain that the fire penetrates into the different compounds of two or more atoms, and, without any destruction of the old jar, produces its effects on these compounds, and thereby changes not the jar but its colour, &c.,--it is still the same jar, only it is red, not black.] [Footnote 187: In p. 109, line 14, I read _gagaṇavibhágakartṛitvasya_.] [Footnote 188: The Siddhánta Muktávalí, p. 112, describes the series of steps:--1. An action, as of breaking, in one of the halves; 2. the disjunction of the two halves; 3. the destruction of the conjunction which originally produced the pot; 4. the destruction of the pot; 5. by the disjunction of the two halves is produced a disjunction of the severed half from the old place; 6. the destruction of the conjunction with that old place; 7. the conjunction with the new place; 8. the cessation of the original impulse of fracture. Here the second disjunction (viz., of the half of the pot and the place) is produced by the previous disjunction of the halves, the intimate causes of the pot.] [Footnote 189: The original has a plural _vibhágán_, _i.e._, disjunctions from the several points.]