Tattva Sangraha Vol 1

SR No.: 007608
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Kamlashila, Ganganatha Jha
Publisher: Oriental Research Institute Vadodra
Publication Year: 1937
Total Pages: 753
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 42 MB

Page 150

(A) NYĀYA DOCTRINE OF THE
SELF'.
155
not fulfilled by these.-The Probans here put forward cannot be said to be
unproven'; as it has been already proved that neither of the two forms of relation in present in the case.-Nor can the Probans be said to be Inconclusive': for, if the Probans were so, then all things would be indicators of all things.-Nor can the Probans be said to be Contradictory '; as it is actually found to be present wherever the Probandum is present.
The other party has also asserted that "from the knowledge of the Instrument follows the knowledge of the Operator (of the Instrument)",This however is not-proved'. Because it has not been proved that the Eye and other organs are specific instruments' (of specific cognitions), in reality; as in the producing of cognitions the causal efficiency' of all the organs is equal; and because any such distinction as that between the * Instrument and the Operator' is purely arbitrary-If what is sought to be proved is only the fact of the Soul being the operator, then the argument is superfluous; because we have never denied the presence of the conceptual (assumed) Operator'. If the Reason be intended to prove the real Operator, then it is Inconclusive'; as the Eye and other organs have never been found to be invariably concomitant with any such real Operator:-(209-210)
It has been argued (in Tea:t 185) that "all subsequent cognitions are apprehended by that same Cogniser who apprehended the first Cognition immediately on birth, etc. etc.". - This is answered in the following:
TEXT (211). THUS THE EXISTENCE OF THE SOUL' NOT BEING TROVED BY ANY OF THE PROOFS (TUT FORWARD), THE INSTANCES THAT HAVE BEEN CITED OF DTERNALITY' AND 'OMNIPRESENCE BECOME
DEVOID OF THE PROBANDUM':-(211)
COMMENTARY. The Opponent has cited the instances of the first cognition' and 'my body': all these instances are devoid of the Probandum',-as the existence of the Soul' has not been proved. --Consequently the Probans is clearly 'inconclusive':-(211)
With the following Text, the Author again introduces the view of Uddyotakara, Bhävivikta and others -
TEXT (212) OTHERS HAVE ASSUMED THAT THE "SOUL' IS PROVED BY PERCEPTION;
BECAUSE I-CONSCIOUSNESS' IS SELF-COGNISABLE, AND THE
SOUL FORMS TRE OBJECT OF THAT CONSCIOUSNESS, (212)
COMMENTARY. These people argue as follows: "Soul is proved by Perception itself; for instance, the notion of 'T', which is independent of any remembrance