252. MAHIMA BHAȚȚA'S CRITICISM OF DHVANI 281

MAHIMA BHAȚȚA'S CRITICISM OF DHVANI 281

being of one member of the series means the not-being of what comes immediately before it, but still essential identity of all the members of the series is recognisable inspite of differences, it forms the phenomenal basis of the concept of action. It is called Laukikī Kriyā.

The Saiva view, in brief, is that the succession, which is the chief characteristic of action, as an external fact, depends on variety, consisting in the being of one and the not-being of another, and that the being and the not-being are the manifestations of the Free Will, which manifests the variety of manifestations. These manifestations are essentially identical with that which manifests them, exactly as the creations of a dream are with the dreaming subject. They are, therefore, essentially of the nature of consciousness and 'free' (Svatantra). Hence the talk of action, which presupposes freedom (Svätantrya) in that which acts, is not unreasonable in relation to even 'jar' (Ghata) from the point of view of the Saivaism, if we remember that the root of all manifestations is the Free Will and that the manifested is essentially identical with its root and, therefore, is free. Thus, on the basis of the Saiva metaphysical principle, Mahima Bhatta holds that whatever may be the basis of knowledge of derivation, the reason for the use of a noun to signify a particular object is the action only1 which is nothing but 'attaining the characteristic being' 'Sattāsadana- lakşaņā'. Accordingly he suggests that to all nouns, standing for a standard of comparison, the affix 'Kvip' is to be affixed, not in the sense of 'acting like' (Upamanadacare), according to Sarvaprātipadikebhyah kvib vā vaktavyah', but in the sense of simple action of 'attaining being', while the noun

1. V. V. 34. 3