________________
226
TATTVASANOPATIA: CHAPTER VII.
towards the bringing about of another succeeding Thought-phase have been spoken of as 'Burdon', -those that are going to appear as the result have been spoken of as the Bearer of the Burden. So that the passage quoted does not warrant tho conclusion desired by the Opponent.
Uddyotakara has argued as follows [This is a clear reference to Nyayazarlika 3-1. 1, page 341, but the passage found extends only up to the words
naivu tvamasi', in line 26, of the present text] "One who does not admit the Soulcannot make sense out of the words of the Buddha who has declared
- O Bhadanta, I am not Colour, I am not Feeling, Name, Impres. sion or Cognition, o Bhadanta ; similarly O Bhikou, you are not Colour, or Feeling, Name, Impression, or Cognition, you are not, 0 Bhadanta' -here Colour and the other Thought-phases have been denied to be the object of 'I.consciousness, this denial is particular, not Universal; while one who denies the Soul' should assert the denial in the Universal form
I am not-you are not! A particular denial always implies a corresponding particular affirmation ; o.g. when it is said I do not see with my left eye', it is clearly implied that 'I do see with my right Eye'; if the man did not see with the right Eye also, then the mention of the qualification
left' in the former assertion would be useless; the assertion should have been in the general form 'I do not see'. Similarly in the case in question when it is said Colour is not the Soul, Cognition is not the Soul', it becomes implied that the Soul is and it is something different from these (Colour, Cognition, and the rest). It may be 'incapable of being spoken of' or any, thing else, but in any case the Soul is there."
It is in answer to this that the Text adds' As regards the particular denial, etc..-That is to say, the mountain of the doctrine of the extant Soul propounded by evil-minded persons has risen up with twenty peaks,- such as Colour is Soul, Cognition is Soul, the Soul has Colour, the Soul has Cogni. tion, Colour subsists in the Soul, Cognition subsists in the Soul' and so forth. - It is as against the first five of these views that the denial has its use 08 against persons who hold those views. The term 'Taddrefin' means those who hold the view that Colour is Soul' and so forth. What is denied in the assertion (made by our Teacher) is exactly those points where the foolish-minded persons might have their doubts; and it is not intended to afirm anything. Otherwise, by saying what could not benefit His hearers, the Expounder would prove himself to be lacking in intelligence.-(349)
End of the section on the Pätsiputriyas' doctrine of Sou'.
