________________
1372
TATTVASANGRAHA: CHAPTER XXV.
appearing at other times and places and in other men, it is imdoubtedly valid".
The answer to this is as follows:
TEXT (3089).
AS REGARDS THE FIRMNESS OF THE CONVICTION PRODUCED BY THE VEDIC INJUNCTION, THAT HAS BEEN ALREADY REJECTED; BECAUSR AS A MATTER OF FACT, THE SAID FIRMNESS IS ALWAYS DOUBTFUL; AS THE MATTER APPREHENDED BY THE SAID COGNITION IS SIMILAR
TO OTHERS. (3089)
COMMENTARY * Already'-.e. under the chapter on the Revealed Word'.
Is similar to others':-.e. it stands on the same footing as the notion derived from such human assertions as the performance of Agnihotra does not lead to Heaven' (3089)
Further, it is a mere assertion of yours that "the Cognition produced by the Vedic Injunction does not vary at different times and places, etc.".
This is what is pointed out in the following:
TEXT (3090).
HOW HAVE THE BRAHMANAS, WHO ARE CERTAINLY NOT OMNISCIENT, BEEN ABLE TO ASCERTAIN THAT " THE COGNITION PRODUCED BY THE VEDIC INJUNCTION IS THE SAME AT ALL PLACES
AND TIMES” ?-(3090)
COMMENTARY.
It has been argued under Text 2906, that-"the validity of verbal and other Cognitions is not to be proved by means of Inference, etc. eto."
The answer to this is as follows:
TEXT (3091). AS A MATTER OF FACT, IT HAS BEEN ALREADY EXPLAINED THAT THE VALIDITY OF PERCEPTION ALSO IS ASCERTAINED BY MEANS OF
INFERENCR. FOR INSTANCE, A CERTAIN PERCEPTION IS VALID, # BECAUSE IT IS PRODUCED BY FLAWLESS CAUSES, LIKE
OTHER PERCEPTIONS.-(3091)
COMMENTARY That argument is called Reductio ad Absurdtem which indicates an undesirable possibility; and it is not undesirable that the validity of Peroep.
