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 186

(B) MIMĀMSA DOCTRINE OF THE SELE.
191
The other party lias adduced (under Text 238, et seq.) such reasons as because he has been apprehended by past I notions and so fortit,-for proving the eternity of the Soul ; against this it is urged that there can be no Cogniser, etc.-ie. neither an eternal nora non-eternal Cogniser is there who conld serve as the corroborative instance; hence the corroborative instance (of the opponent's inference) is 'unproven' (non-existent). For instance, the first and second reasonings (set forth by the opponent) are open to the objection that the corroborative Instance is baset with the defect of living its subject unknown; as there is no such Cogniser known as is the object of the *I-notion of today and also of yesterday.-As regards the third reasoning, the Instance cited— like the single Cognition '-is devoid of the Probandum and the Probans ; because the one Cognition 'intended to be the 'I-notion of the cogniser connected with the same chain. -and also to appertain to a single object,-is not proven' (not admitted by all parties). Thus, on account of the two characters being unproven', the Instance itself has been declared to be unproven
Adduced in due course,-.e, those Reasons that have been adduced above;
in due course '-according to the nature of the defect found in euch.-'Unproven regarding their substratum '; --for instance, in the first and second arguments, the Reasons adduced are unproven regarding their substratum', as it is not admitted that there is any such object as the Cogniser apprehended by 1-notion';in the third argument, though the substratum is not "unproven', inasmuch as the "Cognitions' which form the subject are wellrecognised entities,- yet, what is not proven' in regard to them in the fact of their being qualified by a Cogniser connected with a single chain',
-because it is well known that Cognitions are baseless (devoid of any basis in reality). This is the reason why the Text has used the qualifying term, in due course :-(283-284)
End of section 7 (6) dealing with the Mimamsaka's Doctrine of the Soull.