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 87

812
TATTVASANGRAHA: CHAPTER XIX.
TEXTS (1658-1659).
" Tux negation of the Means of Cognition MUST BE DIFFERENT FROSE PERCEPTION AND THE BEST,- BECAUSE IT IS SPOKEN OF BY THE NAME NEGATION '; -LIKE THE negation of cognisable things.OR THE NEGATION (OF THINGS) MUST BE COGNISED THROUGH A MEANS WHICH IS OF THE SAME NATURE AS ITSELF,- BECAUSE IT IS SOMETHING COGNISABLE, JUST LIKE THE POSITIVE ENTITY. FOR THESE REASONS, THIS MEANS OF COGNITION MUST BE OF A NATURE DIFFERENT FROM THE positive."(Shlokavārtika-NEGATION,
54-55].-(1658-1659)
COMMENTARY.
The 'Negation of Perception and the other Means of Cognition must be regarded as a Means of Cognition different from Perception and the rest,because it is spoken of by the name 'Negation', -just like the negation of cognisable things.
Or, the cognisable object named 'Negation may be the subject (Minor Term),the Probandum regarding it being that it is cognisable through a Means of Cognition of the same nature as itself; because it is a cognisable object' is the Probans ;-the cognisable object called positive' is the Corroborative Instance. From this it follows that the Means of Cognition which is of the same nature as the cognisable 'nogation must be distinct from Perception and the rest which are positive in character.--(1658-1659)
The above arguments (of Kumārila, in support of 'Negation as a distinct Means of Cognition) are answered in the following
TEXT (1660).
AS REGARDS THESE ARGUMENTS—THE 'MODIFICATION OF THE ETERNAL ENTITY (SOUL) HAS BEEN REJECTED ALREADY; THE EXISTENCE OF TRE CONTRARY OF SUCH A MODIFICATION CAN
NOT BE OCCASIONAL.-(1660)
COMMENTARY.
This shows the 'impossibility of the first definition of Negation as the non-modification of the Soul' (see Text 1649). What is meant is as