________________
DHARMAPALA'S COMMENTARY
57 invariable real object, but to an object which is only conventionally true, for example, the chariot' and the like. Though it may be permitted that the mental consciousness is conditioned by a real object endowed with parts (avayavin); yet it grasps also an object which is not its own and which lacks a form similar to one reflected in consciousness. But for the consciousness of the eye and others, there is well-known separate object invariably associated with each of the senses. No such fixity of object is arrived at in the case of mental consciousness.
Moreover, the Truth in its essence is to be realised inwardly by a knowledge born of the repeated practice of trance, and never becomes the object of the discriminative thought (tarka=manas); and again it appears as though it is perceivable, yet it shines as object only of a supreme knowledge born of contemplating what is heard and what is thought out, [and not at all of the mental consciousness]. Thus the object of the mental consciousness becomes absolutely non-existent. For, this object can be no capable of being conditioncause at the moment of its origination ;* nor can it be so in the past and future moments, because the things of past and future are non-entities just like the uncomposite elements of existence, [ether, etc). For this
? Cf. Tattvas. pañ. p. 206; Nyāyavārtika, p. 80—1 where different explanations are given for rathādivat.
* Read in the Sanskrit text p. 21, line 11, jafa Haifastahazfaद्रव्यप्रत्ययमङ्गीक्रियते।
'? Read in the Sanskrit text p. 22, line, 4 स्वसमुत्पत्तौ for स्वसंततौ ।
