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 73

TATTVASANGRAHA : CHAPTER 11.
TEXTS (59-60).
AS A MATTER OF FACT, WHAT BRINGS ABOUT THE JOINT COGNITION (INVOLVED IN RECOGNITION) IS THE FACT THAT RECOGNITION CONSISTS IN AN ASSUMPTION ARISING OUT OF THE POTENCIES OF THE TWO COGNITIONS CONCERNED.-Thus, SUCH THINGS AS WATER, FIRE AND THE LIKE ARE NOT 'PRRCEPTIBLE BY TWO SENSE-ORGANS'; AND HENCE THE PROBANS (OF THE Naiyāyika) IS FOUND TO HAVE ITS SUBSTRATUM UNPROVEN, INADMISSIBLE', AS IS INDICATED BY THE UN. PROVEN CHARACTER OF THE
OBJECT ITSELE.—(60)
COMMENTARY.
Tayoh-i.e. of the Visual and Tactile Cognitions as apprehending (respectively) Colour only and Touch only ;-Potency' is capacity out of that capacity arises the assumption, which constitutes—forms the essence of the Recognition (in question). This shows that Recognition is not perceptible ; firstly, because it is an essentially wrong cognition, apprehending as one what is really not one, and secondly, because its very essence lies in an assumption.-Nor is there any other Means of Cognition (available for bringing about a valid notion of Recognition): firstly, because it apprehends what has been already covered by previous Cognitions, and as such it apprehends what has been already apprehended (and as such, is not of the nature of a Direct Valid Cognition): and secondly, because it is essentially wrong. From all this it follows that the Reason put forward by the Naiyāyika)" Because there is Recognition "-is "inconclusive'. If the validity of Recognition had been established and admitted, then the Reason would not be open to the charge of being 'inconclusive'; because in cases where notions of such things as the Jar and the like have appeared, taking in, in accordance with the capacity of things, a common ides of its Colour and other details,-if the Colour and the Touch have been duly apprehended, each by itself, by the organs of Vision and of Touch, then, at some future time, if the impressions of the things perceived present themselves accompanied by signs indicative of those things, there appears the notion of "unity', 'samoness', which is essentially wrong, and is of the nature of
Remembrance' (not Direct Cognition). It is for this reason that in this joint notion, the Colour-Blue- also presents itself, though it is not