Tattva Sangraha Vol 2

SR No.: 007609
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Kamlashila, Ganganatha Jha
Publisher: Oriental Research Institute Vadodra
Publication Year: 1939
Total Pages: 887
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 84 MB

Page 583

1308
TATTVASANGRAHA: CHAPTER XXV.
Text shows that the Reason adduced is not
The following Inadmissible's
TEXT (2906).
"AS A MATTER OF FACT, THE VALIDITY OF VERBAL AND OTHER COGNITIONS IS NOT TO BE PROVED BY MEANS OF INFERENCE. OTHERWISE THE VALIDITY OF SENSE-PERCEPTION ALSO MIGHT HAVE TO BE PROVED BY INFERENCE (WHICH IS
ABSURD).”—(2906)
COMMENTARY.
The cognition produced by the Veda cannot have its validity confirmed by Sense-perception, because what is said in the Veda is beyond the reach of the senses.--Nor can it be proved or confirmed by Inference; as that would lead to incongruities.
Shabdanám : this includes the cognitions produced by the Veda. Or, particular details may be learnt from the context.-(2906)
The following might be urged-We do hold that the validity of Senseperception is proved by means of Inference,
The answer to this is as follows:
TEXTS (2907-2908).
" IF THE VALIDITY OF COGNITIONS WERE PROVED BY ANOTHER COGNITION, THEN, OF THIS LATTER. ALSO, THE VALIDITY WOULD BE PROVED BY ANOTHER, AND SO ON AND ON, THERE WOULD BE INFINITE REGRESSIF THE VALIDITY OF THE COGNITION THAT PROVES THE VALIDITY OF ANOTHER COGNITION BE NOT PROVED BY ANY OTHER COGNITION, THEN THE SAME MIGHT BE THE CASE WITH THOSE WHOSE VALIDITY IS HELD TO BE PROVED BY
OTHERS."-(2907-2908)
COMMENTARY
If, like the Sense-perception, the Inference also had its validity proved by another Inference, then there would be Infinite Regress.
If the validity of the cognition called 'Inference' were not proved by another cognition, then in the case of Sense-perception also, whose validity is held to be proved by Inference, the validity would be such as is not proved by another cognition; as there would be no difference between the two cases.-(2907-2908)
In the following Text, the Bauddha supports the view that the Reason put forward is 'Inadmissible':