Buddhist Logic v2.c19.s3.18

v2.c19.s3.18

(12. 22). That a Particular (of this kind) should also be cognized (by the conceiving, synthetic, faculty of our mind, or) by inference, is impossible. (The sphere of absolute particulars is not the sphere of inference). The latter cognizes relations,¹¹ and relations are of two kinds only, (either logical or real), either Identity or Causation.¹² In an absolute particular no relation can be found: (Uniformally) related ¹³ are always two Universals. (12. 24). (But a real Universal is an impossibility).¹ A thing cannot represent a unity and reside in different places, at different times and in different conditions. (12. 25). (Since Universals are thus illusory realities, and inferential knowledge has to deal with Universals only, does this mean that their knowledge is altogether objectless? ²). The Universals are indeed (not realities ³), they are logical constructions produced by a congenital capacity (of our Reason ⁴); we must admit that their objective existence in the external world, belongs (only) to the domain of our inferential knowledge, it is either a dialectical (superstructure upon reality) or an objectivized image.⁵