________________
-X195]
TRANSLATION
In opposition to this view it is asserted that the Manifest
is 'objective"; "objective' here stands for jection set aside
0.5- 'what can be apprehended'. That is, it is
exterior to the Idea.-And because it is 'objective', therefore, 'common —i. e., apprehended ( simultaneously) by several persons. If it were nothing more or less than the Idea, then in that case,-in as much as Ideas, being in the form of 'functions', belong specially to particular individuals, all that is ‘manifest' would have to belong specially to particular individuals. That is to say, as a matter of fact, the Idea of one person is not apprehended by another, the cognition of another person being always uncognisable. In the case of [ Manifest substance such as the ) glance of a dancing girl, it is found that many persons continue to stare at it at the same time. This could not be the case of it were otherwise ( i. e., if the glance were a mere Idea ).
(92) 'Insentient'-Nature (Prakıtı), Sentient Faculty (Buddhı) and the rest, are all insentient. That is, 'sentience' cannot belong to the Buddhi as held by the Vainās'ika (Buddhist).
(93) 'Productive' ---i. e., possessed of the faculty of producing. The form of the word to be used would have been prasavadharmā', but the author has used the particular possessive asfix (rin), in order to indicate the constant character of the property of productiveness as belonging to the Manifest; the sense being that the Manifest is never devoid of similar as well as dissimilar products.
(94) The author attributes the properties of the Manifest to the Unmanifest-So also is Nature',-i.e., as the Manifest, so the Unmanifest (Nature). [That is, the properties of the Manifest, just enumerated, belong to Nature also). o
(95) The dissimilarity of these from the Spirit is next stated. The spirit is the reverse.
