DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.641#0311
S04 THE HINDOO MYTHOLOGY.
receive water by the hands of the gardener, so the trees of
a forest, I see, are dependent on the agency of the clouds.
But I wish to know what you mean by nature; is it some-
thing inherent in living substances, or distinct from them?
If you say it is inherent, then it will appear that substances
can form themselves; if you affirm, that it is distinct, you
contradict your own principles, for you maintain that no-
thing exists distinct from matter; or if you say, that there
is something beside matter, which is capable of all things,
then know, that this is what we call God. Therefore you
cannot maintain that there is any thing distinct from the
body.
U)ibeliever. You affirm then, that there is one God, who
is from and to everlasting, separate from matter, almighty,
the creator of all. I affirm, that nature is almighty, in-
finite, and separate from matter.
The Noiyayikii. Excellent! Excellent! You make an
endless number of works, and the creators numberless.
I affirm, that numberless works have one creator. I leave
you (unbeliever) to judge which is the most excellent of
these opinions. To express your opinion requires as many
letters as to express mine; you call the creator nature, and
I call him God:—what do you gain then in rejecting a
God?
Unbeliever, (a little abashed.) Well, for the sake of the
argument, I acknowledge that there is a God; but why is
he to be eternal ?
The Noiyayikii. If he be not eternal, then he must
have a creator and a destroyer. If you deny his eternity,
then I ask, who is his creator and destroyer ?—and thus,
receive water by the hands of the gardener, so the trees of
a forest, I see, are dependent on the agency of the clouds.
But I wish to know what you mean by nature; is it some-
thing inherent in living substances, or distinct from them?
If you say it is inherent, then it will appear that substances
can form themselves; if you affirm, that it is distinct, you
contradict your own principles, for you maintain that no-
thing exists distinct from matter; or if you say, that there
is something beside matter, which is capable of all things,
then know, that this is what we call God. Therefore you
cannot maintain that there is any thing distinct from the
body.
U)ibeliever. You affirm then, that there is one God, who
is from and to everlasting, separate from matter, almighty,
the creator of all. I affirm, that nature is almighty, in-
finite, and separate from matter.
The Noiyayikii. Excellent! Excellent! You make an
endless number of works, and the creators numberless.
I affirm, that numberless works have one creator. I leave
you (unbeliever) to judge which is the most excellent of
these opinions. To express your opinion requires as many
letters as to express mine; you call the creator nature, and
I call him God:—what do you gain then in rejecting a
God?
Unbeliever, (a little abashed.) Well, for the sake of the
argument, I acknowledge that there is a God; but why is
he to be eternal ?
The Noiyayikii. If he be not eternal, then he must
have a creator and a destroyer. If you deny his eternity,
then I ask, who is his creator and destroyer ?—and thus,