[Footnote 24: Cf. Sextus Empiricus, P. Hyp. ii. In the chapter on the Buddhist system _infra_, we have an attempt to establish the authority of the universal proposition from the relation of cause and effect or genus and species.] [Footnote 25: _Adṛishṭa_, _i.e._, the merit and demerit in our actions which produce their effects in future births.] [Footnote 26: This is an old Buddhist retort. See Burnouf, Introd., p. 209.] [Footnote 27: Rig-Veda, x. 106. For the Aśwamedha rites, see Wilson's Rig-Veda, Preface, vol. ii. p. xiii.] [Footnote 28: Or this may mean "and all the various other things to be handled in the rites."] CHAPTER II. THE BAUDDHA SYSTEM. At this point the Buddhists remark: As for what you (Chárvákas) laid down as to the difficulty of ascertaining invariable concomitance, your position is unacceptable, inasmuch as invariable concomitance is easily cognisable by means of identity and causality. It has accordingly been said-- "From the relation of cause and effect, or from identity as a determinant, results a law of invariable concomitance--not through the mere observation of the desired result in similar cases, nor through the non-observation of it in dissimilar cases."[29] On the hypothesis (of the Naiyáyikas) that it is concomitance and non-concomitance (_e.g._, A is where B is, A is not where B is not) that determine an invariable connection, the unconditional attendance of the major or the middle term would be unascertainable, it being impossible to exclude all doubt with regard to instances past and future, and present but unperceived. If one (a Naiyáyika) rejoin that uncertainty in regard to such instances is equally inevitable on our system, we reply: Say not so, for such a supposition as that an effect may be produced without any cause would destroy itself by putting a stop to activity of any kind; for such doubts alone are to be entertained, the entertainment of which does not implicate us in practical absurdity and the like, as it has been said, "Doubt terminates where there is a practical absurdity."[30] 1. By ascertainment of an effectuation, then, of that (viz., of the designate of the middle) is ascertained the invariable concomitance (of the major); and the ascertainment of such effectuation may arise from the well-known series of five causes, in the perceptive cognition or non-cognition of cause and effect. That fire and smoke, for instance, stand in the relation of cause and effect is ascertained by five indications, viz., (1.) That an effect is not cognised prior to its effectuation, that (2.) the cause being perceived (3.) the effect is perceived, and that after the effect is cognised (4.) there is its non-cognition, (5.) when the (material) cause is no longer cognised.