________________
378
TATTVASANURAHA: CHAPTER XT.
It has been argaed (under Text 659, above) that the notion of being attached that appears with regard to wint is detached, etc. etc."-The answer to this is penvided in the following
TEXTS (668-669).
A MESCONCEPTION DOES NOT APPEAR ALWAYS IN ACCORDANCE WITH A PRIMARY CONCEPTION; FOR INSTANCE, THE NOTION OF Two MOONS' APPEARS INDEPENDENTLY OF ITS SIMILARITY TO ANY OTHER (PRIMARY) NOTION, THROUGH SOME INTERNAL DERANGEMENT, WHILE THE MIND IS TURNED ELSEWHERE.-OR, THE REQUISITE PRIMARY' IN THE CASE IN QUESTION MAY BE THAT SAME THING WHICH HAS BEEN PRODUCED IN THE allached FORM AND THE LIKE (BUT IS MISCONCEIVED AS BEING detached OR OTHER
WISE).-(668-669)
COMMENTARY. That all Misconceptions appear only throngh the perception of similarity (to a primary) cannot be admitted ; because there are some misconceptions which are produced, independently of all similarity, merely through some disorder in the sense-organs. For instance, when a man has the fancies of his Mind turned elsewhere, though what is actually before the eyes is a single Moon, yet, on account of the sense-organ concerned (the Eyes) being deranged by disease and darkness, there appears the cognition furnished by the form of Zwo Moons; and this is quite clear and free from all taint of being entirely fenciful.
The phraserhile the Mind is turned elsewhere shows that the notion of two moons' is entirely indeterminate in character; the idea being that in an indeterminate notion, there can be no perception of similarity; as this latter is always in the form of the cognition of some sort of unity between the thing seen now and that seen previously; and as such, it must be of the nature of some verbal expression relative to the previously perceived thing.
Or, granting that the previous Misconception is in the wake of a Primary Cognition,-oven so, what the other party desires cannot be proved.-This is what is shown by the words-Or, the requisite Primary, etc. etc. The phrase "and the like' is meant to include the thing born in the detached form. What is meant is that the same thing, produced as attached or detached, - when conceived of as precluding things of the other kind, comes to bo spoken by a name applied to it in accordance with that (attached or detached) form which has been perceived first; and this may be regarded as the Primary (of the later misconception of the same attached thing as detached, or vice bersa). So that the argument adduced by you does not prove what is desired by you.-(668-669)
