________________
EXAMINATION OF THE FIRST CATEGORY
SUBSTANCE.
339
TEXT (590).
IF THE PERCEPTIBILITY OF ATOMS IS NOT ADMITTED BECAUSE OF THEIR BEING NOT-DIFFERENTIATED, THEN HOW IS IT SEEN IN THE CASE OF THE LAMP AND SUCH THINGS? OR, IS THE COMPOSITE HELD TO BE OF THAT
KIND!-(590)
COMMENTARY.
If it is held that what cannot be cognised in differentiated form cannot be perceptible, then, how is it that perceptibility is found in the Lamp, wherein also the individual flames appearing in quick succession cannot be differentiated 2-Or is it that the Composite only is a thing that is perceptible, even though its components are not differentiated? The reason this put forwnrd by the Opponent is inconclusive.-(590)
The following Text advises the other Party as to the way in which he should level his criticism :
TEXTS (591-592).
ALL THAT CAN BE URGED IS-" ON THE DEFINITE COGNITION OF
THESE (ATOss), HOW IS IT THAT IT IS NOT REALISED THAT WHAT IS PERCHIVED AS Blue IS THE FORM OF THE Atoms?"
-BUT THAT ALSO CANNOT BE THE CAUSE; BECAUSE THE COGNITION IN QUESTION CANNOT BE WITHOUT AN OBJBOT ; AND YET IT CANNOT HAVE FOR ITS OBJECT A single gross object, AS THERE IS INCOMPATIBILITY BETWEEN gro88.
ness AND one-ness.-(591-592)
COMMENTARY
*These i.e. of the Atoms.
That also cannot be the Cause etc., etc. ' i.e. the fact of the Atoms being perceived as differentiated from one another cannot be the cause of the fact that the Blue colour is not perceived as belonging to the Atoms: because the certainty regarding this can be got at from other sources. For instance, the upholder of the 'External Thing cannot hold a Cognition to bo devoid of an object; if he did admit it, then his view would come to be the view of pure Idealism'.
Under the circunstances, the Colour, etc. which forin the objects of the Cognition, and appear therein in the gross form,- is it one or many ? If one, is it composed of the components, or not so composed ? In either
