________________
DOCTRINE OF GOD.
TEXT (58).
VISUAL COGNITION AND TACTILE COGNITION ALWAYS APPEAR DIEFERENTLY; THEY CANNOT THEREFORE HAVE ONE AND THE SAME SUBSTRATUM, -JUST LIKE THE COGNITION OF ODOUR
AND OTHER THINGS.—(58)
COMMENTARY.
In the argument (put forward by the Naiyāyika, under verse 48, above) two kinds of things have been mentioned as the Subject what is perceptible by two Sense-organs and what is imperceptible':-Now 18 a matter of fact, there is no object that is known (accepted by all parties) to be perceptible by two Sense-organs'; for instance, both Visual Cognition and Tactile Cognition, are known to appear in different forms, respectively as manifesting the Blue and other Colours and as manifesting Hardness, Softness, etc. of the things touched; thus both these cognitions cannot have the same objective, because they appear as different like the Cognitions of Odour, Taste and other things. The argument may be formulated thus:Any two cognitions appearing in different forms cannot have the same objective, like the Cognitions of Odour and Taste,-the Visual and Tactile Cognitions do appear in different forms hence the attributing of both to a single object would be a direct contravention of the said universal proposition. -If, even when appearing in different forms, Cognitions were to have the sa me objective, then the Cognitions of Colour, Sound and such diverse things also might be regarded as having the same objective; this is the reason that Annuls the argument of the Naiyāyika.-(58)
Says the Naiyāyika " If the two Cognitions (Visual and Thetile) cannot have the same objective, then how is it that there is the recognition in the form that I am tonching in the dark the same jar that I had seen in the light '*Hence the proposition set forth (by the Buddhist is annnlled by Inference. The Inference has boen formulated by Uddyotakara in the following form The two Cognitions under dispute,-the Visual Cognition and the Tactile Cognition,-have the same object, --becanse it is recalled (recognised).-like the Cognition of the Blue Lotus.''
The answer to this is provided in the following Text :
Darshana
• This discussion is a clear reference to Myye. Sara 3. 1. 1- sparsundblyamoksīrthagrahanät'.
+ This is a reference to Nyāyt Vārzika, 3.1. 1, page 350, Bib. Ind.
