Indian Philosophy v2.c24.s19.32

v2.c24.s19.32

karma, while passivity is only the absence of activity. Property may be either general or particular. Disposition is a quality. If Aristotle had proceeded on a definite principle, he would have argued thus: Things possessing qualities, either permanent or temporary, exist in relations of time and space bound together with other things in a network of reciprocal relations, and in that case substance, quality, action and relation would be the main heads. The defective character of Aristotle's analysis was noticed by the Stoics and the Neo-platonists, Kant, who thinks that Aristotle simply jotted down the categories as they occurred to him, and Hegel, who observes that Aristotle threw them together anyhow. Mill rather contemptuously remarks that Aristotle's list "is like a division of animals into men, quadrupeds, horses, asses and ponies." Cp. with the Vaiśeṣika scheme the Jaina classification of all things into substances, qualities and modifications (I.P., pp. 312 ff., and Uttarādhyayana, I., S.B.E., vol. xlv). The earlier Mīmāṃsakas accept the categories of power (śakti) and similarity (sādṛśya). Udayana rejects these, as well as number (saṃkhyā). See Kiraṇāvali, p. 6; Saptapadārthī, p. 10; Nyāyakandalī, pp. 7, 15, 144 ff.