________________
180
TATTVASANGRAHA: CHAPTER VII.
in front, the persons standing on the two sides of it also would perceive it as red.
This objection is applicable under both views of things being momentary and not-momentary.-(260)
With the following Text, the Author proceeds to point out the objection that would be applicable only under the view that things are not-momentary
TEXT (261).
TH OPPONENT'S THEORY WOULD ALSO ENTAIL THE INCONGRUITY OF THE ROCK-CRYSTAL BECOMING DIFFERENT WITH EACH OBJEOT PLACED BEFORE IT, IF THERE WERE A REAL TRANSFORMATION OF
IT INTO THB REFLECTION.—(261)
COMMENTARY.
If the Rock-crystal and such things were really transformed into the reflection of the object placed before them, then,-just as the reflections of the various things placed before the reflector appearing one after the other, are different in character, and hence there is no identity among them,in the same manner, in the Soul, and in the Rock-crystal and such things also, there would be differences due to the character of each thing presented to it (and reflected therein).-If the perception of the Reflection, however, be admitted to be an illusion, then there can be no objection to it,--this is what is meant by the epithet 'real':-(261)
TEXT (262)—(First line).
FROM THIS IT FOLLOWS THAT THE SAID PERCEPTION OF THE REFLECTION IS AN ILLUSION,- APPBARING IN CONNEOTION WITH THINGS POS.
SESSED OF DIVERSE UNTHINKABLE POTENCIES.(262)
COMMENTARY.
Inasmuch as, under both theories, it is not possible for the Reflector to becomo transformed into the Reflection,-it becomes established that it is an Illusion.
Question - If that is so, then such Illusion appears only in connection with things like the Rook-crystal, and not with things like the Wall."
The answer is supplied by the words-In connection with things possessed of diverse unthin leable potencies. -Diverse, -of various kinds and unthinkable', -are the potencies of things; no objection can be raised against the particular potentialities of things, -as these potentialities are the effects of the series of causes that have brought about each thing. In fact, you also can have no dispute against this much; as you have yourself said
Who can take objection to the fact that it is Fire, not Akasha, that burns ?'.-(262)
