________________
58
ĀLAMBANAPARĪKSĀ
reason, the word “others” is said to include the body of five sorts of consciousness.
Then, if [you say that] the mental consciousness owes its existence to what is brought home by the sensual consciousness; ' how is that also possible ? It cannot take place either in the same moment as the sensual consciousness or in the immediate next moment. It is not possible in the immediate next moment, because the object like the colour, etc., has already been vanished away in the immediate next moment. Nor does the object of the present moment become condition to it, because it has been grasped by sensual consciousness.
[If you say that] the mental consciousness grasps naturally the external object of its own accord, then there will be no possibility of existence of the blind or deaf, etc. [To accept] a sense faculty other than the eye, etc. is contradictory to the inferential knowledge. The denial of extra material object [which may suit to the mental consciousness being gladly admitted, why should we entertain a bias for the mental consciousness alone? To the visual and other consciousness material things serving as supporting causes become bases." [But to the mental consciousness there is no such thing as basis.) What is short of basis, has by nature no
Read in the text, p. 22, line, 6, sprafatarECHTOL Halfagran i Whole discussion below, cf. 971091fafa, II, 239—244...
* Cf. Tattvas. pañ. p. 825 ; Nyāyabinduţikā. p. 10.
Read in the Sanskrit text, p. 22, line 12, zeifafagrarai रूपमाश्रयप्रत्ययःसत् आयतनं भवति ।
