________________
674
TATTVASANGRAHA : CHAPTER XVII.
But even if it is meant that it is the Regulator, the Reason is Inconclusive, as there is no incongruity (indicated).
If activity' in general be what is meant, then also the Reason is Inconclusive, as there is no incongruity indicated.--(1353-1355)
Objection :-"If the Cognition were of the form of the Object, then the sameness of the object might constitute the character of the 'Means of Cognitiou; as a matter of fact, however, the Cognition that is brought about is only of a form similar to that of the Object, and of the same character hence it cannot be as suggested : just as the Colour and Taste of a thing belong to a category quite different".
This is what is anticipated and answered in the following
TEXTS (1356-1357),
IF IT BE ARGUED THAT—"THE COGNITION CANNOT HAVE THE SAME
TORM AS THE OBJECT APPREHENDED, BECAUSE IT BELONGS TO A DIFFERENT CATEGORY,-LIKE THE COGNITION OF COLOUR, TASTE, ETC.", -[THEN THE ANSWER IS AS FOLLOWS] IN DUE ACCORDANCE WITH OUR DOCTRINE WE HAVE CLEARLY EXPLAINED THIS AND ALSO OTHER THINGS IN COURSE OF OUR REJECTION OF THE IDEA OF A real OBJECT BEING
APPREHENDED.-(1356-1357)
COMMENTARY.
We who are followers of the doctrine of Idealism readily accept what has been urged; it does not affect our position at all. In fact, the objection that you have urged against the object apprehended has been only indistinctly (vaguely) stated; while this is exactly that we have stated qnite clearly, while examining--.e. rejecting-the idea--conviction—that there is something real that is apprehended.-(1356-1357)
What is that clear statement in proof of your doctrine ?
Question :- Answer -
TEXT (1358).
IF THERE WERE ABSOLUTE sameness of form, TREN Cognition WOULD BECOME Non-cognition; AS FOR PARTIAL sameness of form, THAT WOULD MAKE EVERY COGNITION APPREHENSIVE
OF EVERYTHING.-(1358)
COMMENTARY,
Absolute sameness of form' would consist in the fact of the Cognition being excluded' from exactly those homogeneous things from which the
