________________
EXAMINATION OF THE DEFINITION OF " SENSE-PERCEPTION ", 663
TEXT (1327). THERE CAN BE NO shape APART FROM THE Colour ; AND WITH THE APPARENT COLOUR, THERE IS NO COMPATIBILITY (IN THE CASE
IN QUESTION).-(1327)
COMMENTARY This is easily understood.-(1327)
The Author now sums up his arguments
TEXTS (1328-1329). IT, WITHOUT REGARD TO THE FORM OF THINGS, validity WERE PRESUMED ON THE GROUND OF MERE COMPATIBILITY WITH FRUITFUL ACTION,
THEN HOW WOULD THIS NOT CONTRADICT SUCH ASSERTIONS (OF YOURS) AS THAT THE DEFINITE COGNITION OF THE THING IS IN THE FORM OF THE THING'? AS REGARDS THE POSSIBILITY OF COMPATIBILITY' (IN THE CASE OF THE NOTION OF THE 'YELLOW CONCH-SHELL '), THAT CAN ONLY BE THE RESULT OF THE IMPRESSION (OF A PREVIOUS COGNITION).-1328
1329)
COMMENTARY. Validity cannot be presumed merely on the basis of the compatibility of effective action, without regard to the form; as in that case the cognition in the form of the thing itself might have to be regarded as invalid.
In the form of the thing i.e. in the form that appears in the cognition.
Such assertions as ';this is meant to show that the presumption in question would go against such assertions of the Teacher ag— As the form of the thing figures in the Cognition, in that form is the thing rightly cognised':
As regards compatibility with effective action', (in the case) in question. it should be understood to be the result of the Impression left by previous apprehensions. That is to say, the idea of the yellow conch-shell' is the effect of the Impression left by a previous apprehension of the white conchshell. And the compatibility with effective action (that has been said to be present in the case) is due to this Impression.-(1328-1829)
The Author now proceeds to show how the character of Sense-percep. tion' belongs to the Sensation of Pleasure, etc. :
