________________
914
TATTVASANGRAHA : CHAPTER XXII.
TEXT (1907).
IN THE CASE OF WATER AND OTHER THINGS, THE RECRPTACLE (CONTAINER)
WOULD BE THERE AS SERVING TO PREVENT THEIR FALLING DOWN. IN THE CASE OF COGNITIONS HOWEVER, WHICH ARE DEVOID OF MOVEMENT (AND HENCE OF FALLING), WHAT WOULD BE THE USE OF RECEPTACLES (OR
CONTAINERS) ?-(1907)
COMMENTARY.
In the case of Earth, etc. which are corporeal, things are produced on the spot where the material cause exists, and never in a place where that cause does not exist; hence that which serves as preventive of their moving away from that place is regarded as the Receptacle (Substratum, Container). No such thing is possible in the case of what is incorporeal.-(1907)
TEXT (1908).
IF THEN, THE SUBSISTENCE (OF THE COGNITIONS IN THE BODIES) BE ASSUMED TO BE OF THE NATURE OF 'IDENTIFICATION' (SAMENESS), -THAT ALSO CANNOT BE RIGHT. BECAUSE FOR YOU, COGNITION CANNOT BE OF THE NATURE
OF THE BODY.-(1908)
COMMENTARY.
If what is meant by 'Subsistence' is being of the same nature', that also cannot be admitted. For you, who insist upon the External Things only, it cannot be right to assert that Cognition is of the nature of the Body'; though it is all right for me who posit the Cognition only; and for whom the Body also is of the nature of the Alayavijnana (a series or chain of Cognitions),-(1908)
Question :-"Why cannot it be right to assert that Cognition is of the nature of the Body) ?"
Answer:
