________________
EXAMINATION OF THE DOCTRINE OF 'SELF-SUFFICIENT VALIDITY'. 1345
It has been argued (by the Mimāmsaka) under Text 2863, that-“If it is due to extraneons causes, then there is no Infinite Regress, because it would be dependent upon Validity and this is there all right ".-The answer to this is-'If Invalidity were due, etc.'-'Etat' stands for Invalidity, * tat', for the Valid Cognition.-(3002-3003)
"Why is it unstable, not firmly established ?"
Question: Answer:
TEXTS (3004-3005).
FOR INSTANCE, YOU ASSERT' VALIDITY' ON THE GROUND OF THE ABSENCE OF SUBLATING COGNITION; AND 'ABSENCE OF SUBLATION' ALSO IS HELD TO BE A DISTINCT FORM OF COGNITION, NAMED 'NON-APPREHENSION'; SO THAT THE VALIDITY OF THIS LATTER ALSO IS ASSERTED ON THE GROUND OF THE ABSENCE OF SUBLATING COGNITION; AND THIS PROCESS PROCEEDING ON AND ON, THERE CAN BE NO RESTING GROUND (STABILITY).
-(3004-3005)
COMMENTARY.
It has been argued (by the Mimāmsaka), under Text 2866, that—" The sublating Cognition consists in the conviction that the thing cognised is otherwise than as cognised; and this conviction, being self-sufficient, sets aside the preceding Cognition ".
The answer to this is as follows:
TEXT (3006).
BECAUSE THE FACT OF THE VALIDITY OF THE SUBLATING COGNITION BEING SELF-SUFFICIENT HAS NOT BEEN PROVED, THEREFORE IT
CANNOT SET ASIDE THE PRECEDING COGNITION. (3006)
COMMENTARY.
As the form of Cognition called 'Non-apprehension is always dependent upon something else, its validity cannot be regarded as proved.—(3006)
The following Text proceeds to confirm the view that the Opponent's view involves an Infinite Regress :
