________________
418
TATTVASANGRAHA : CHAPTER XIII.
Regress, a further property (of is-ness) is not postulatod, then, in view of these notions, -as appearing in connection with the Categories, or with the property of Ecistence,--the Reason would have to be regarded as fallible' (antrus).
It may be that the 'inconclusiveness of the Reason is not due to its being Too Wide; even so, how could the defect of its negation being open to * doubt be avoided ?- This is what is pointed ont in the words - Then again, etc. etc. what is meant by all-embracing concomitance is the cognition of the fact of the Reason being invariably concomitant with the whole of the thing in which the Probandum is sought to be proved.
The following argument might be urged :-"The required concomitance is there all right; because, if there were no other Cause, how could the notion in question of the Universal Cow', etc.) be different from the notion of the thing itself! There can be no difference among notions of the same object, even when they are many. If there were such difference, then, there could be no diversity even among the notions of different things, like Colour, Taste and so forth; because diversity among things is always due to the diversity among Cognitions."
This is not right; as a matter of fact, there can be no idea of Universal' in regard to the Specific Peculiarity' of tlings. Because the Specific Peculiarity never forms the object of any notion associated with verbal expression.-But,-aven in the absence of any Universal',-it the view be held that each thing by itself is ono only and is uxcluded, from other things, on some basis,-and it is through this basis that there come about various assumptions and verbal expressions of an all-embracing character, in accordance with conventions and the experience of people ;-if such were the view, then there would be no opposition to it. This is the reason why the Text speaks of the 'absence of concomitance' (745-746)
It has been argued (above, imder Text 719) that-" The comprehensive idea that appears in regard to the Cow and other things, etc. etc.".-This is answered in the following
TEXT (747)
THE ARGUMENT IN PROOF OF THE UNIVERSAL' THAT HAS BEEN URGED AFTER THE ONE JUST DISPOSED OF, ALSO BECOMES REJEOTRD BY THIS BECAUSE THE FALLACY OF 'FOTILITY AND THE REST ARE EQUALLY APPLIOABLE TO THAT
ALSO.-(747)
COMMENTARY.
* By this,-i.e. by the refutation just explained.-As the same objections are equally applicable to that also ; for instance, the defect of being futile',
