________________
(4) NYAYA DOCTRINE OF THE SELF,
157
spoken of as the 'Lion, the notion of Lion' can never be true in reference to both the Boy and the Lion.-It might be urged that "the Body and the Soul are actually spoken of as distinct, in such expressions as My body, etc,'; and to that extent, the said figurative attribution does become false", - But it is not so: as it might be possible to regard the notion of Soul' with regard to the Soul also as false; as in this connection also, we find such expressions as My Soul', where there is a distinction made between the two. -If it be urged that in this case the distinction is assumed ",—then the same may be said in regard to the other case also.
Even if the expression I am fair is used in its direct sense, why should not the Soul be the object of this notion ?"
The answer is—The Soul is not held to be of the nature, etc.-i.e. of the nature of 'fair-complexioned', etc.; for the simple reason that it is not possible for the Soul to have any such qualities as Colour and the like.-- (213-214)
It has been explained that it is not right to regard the Soul' as forming the object of 'I consciousness, because this latter is devoid of the form of the Soul. The following Text proceeds to show that the same cannot be right also because in that case there would be no dispute (between us and the Naiyāyika) :
TEXT (215). IF THE SOUL WERE REALLY AMENABLE TO PERCEPTION, THEN WIRREFORE SHOULD THIS DISPUTE ARISE REGARDING ITS EXISTENCE
AND OTHER THINGS ?-(215)
COMMENTARY. Existence and other things '-i.e. regarding its Existence, Eternality, Omnipresence and so forth.—(215)
The following might be urged“Just as, for you, even though the Blue and other things are actually perceived, yet disputes arise in regard to their momentariness and other characters, which are held to be non-different from the nature of those things ;-in the same manner, there might be dispute regarding the Existence, etc. of the Soul Also".
The answer to this is provided in the following Text:
TEXT (216). THE 'I-CONSCIOUSNESS ALWAYS FUNCTIONS IN THE FORM OF A DETINITE COGNITION ; AND BETWEEN A Definite Cognition AND A MERE Indefinite Conception, THERE IS ALWAYS THE RELATION OF THE ANNULLER AND THE
ANNULLED' —(216)
COMMENTARY In the case of Blue and the rest, it is only right that even though they are apprehended by Perception, there should be clispute regarding their
