process of subdivision is then repeated, so that each
　　   phase  of  the  k.sana  itself   consists   of  three
　　   subphases, giving in all nine subphases. But here the
　　   process  of  division   ends,  the  subphases   being
　　   considered  partless  and indivisible, that is, tempo
　　   ral minims.  Thus  the subphase  can be considered  a
　　   true atom of time, since it exists  outside  the flow
　　   of time, in the manner of Whitehead's epochs.(ll)
　　　　  The natures of these atomisms  in pre-Maadhyamika
　　   Indian  thought  have  two  important   implications.
　　   First, they  imply  acceptance  of the  principle  of
　　   discontinuity  as it applies to our notions  of space
　　   and time.  This  is just what  it means  to speak  of
　　   minims   of  space   (paramaa.nu)  and  time  (k.sana
　　   subphase).  That there can be a least possible length
　　   and a least po ssible  duration  means that space and
　　   time are not continuous but rather discontinuous--for
　　   example, time does not flow  like an electric  clock,
　　   but rather it jumps like a hand-wound clock.  This is
　　   an  inescapable   consequence   of  saying  that  the
　　   paramaa.nu is of definite- but indivisible extension,
　　   and  that  the  k.sana  subphase  is of definite  but
　　   indivisible duration.
　　　　  The second implication  of these atomisms is that
　　   their proponents  implicitly  accepted  the notion of
　　   spatiotemporal  continuity.  It is one  thing  to say
　　   that the atoms  of space or time are indivisible  and
　　   partless;  it is quite  another  to say that they are
　　   dimensionless  and nonadditive.  The former assertion
　　   might  be seen  as a counter  to the argument  of the
　　   opponent of atomism that since a

　　　　　　　　　　　　  p.288

　　   physical  atom  is of  definite  extension.  it  must
　　   itself be divisible and so consist of parts.  To this
　　   the atomist replies by arbitrarily  establishing  the
　　   measure of the atom as the least possible  extension.
　　   But  the  second   assertion.   that   the  atom   is
　　   dimensionless  and  nonadditive.  goes  too  far.  It
　　   implicitly  accepts the opponent's thesis of infinite
　　   divisibility.   The   property   of   nonadditiveness
　　   properly applies only to true geometrical points on a
　　   line.  And with this notion  comes  as well  the idea
　　   that between  any two points  on a line there  are an
　　   infinite  number  of  points;  that   is,   the  line