________________
CHAPTER XXI.
.
Examination of the doctrine of Traikālya'--' Things
continuing to excist during three points of Time.'
COMMENTARY.
Under Text 4, the True Doctrine has been called 'Immobile'; the Author proceeds to support that idea.
TEXT (1786).
ON THE GROUND OF THE GOLD CONTINUING TO BE THE SAME, WHEX IT COMES TO BE REGARDED AS SOMETHING PERMANENT, SOME BUDDHISTS ALSO HOLD (ON THE BASIS OF THIS) THAT THE THING (BY ITSELF PERMANENT) PASSES
THROUGH DIVERSE STATES.-(1786)
COMMENTARY.
The Buddhist Doctrine is that there is nothing that has continued existence'; against this, the following objection is urged -"How can it be said that there is nothing that has continued existence '- when as a matter of fact, some Buddhists (of the Vaibhāşika-Realistic-School) also,liko Dharmaträta and others-have accepted the view that an object continues to exist at three points of time, through its diverse states ;-this view is held on the analogy of the Gold (discussed above) continuing to exist (in the state of the Pot and that of the Dish)?”
This same idea is further expounded in the following texts
TEXTS (1787–1790).
"JUST AS GOLD DOES NOT ABANDON ITS COLOUR, EVEN WHEN THERE ARE
DIFFERENCES IN ITS STATE,SIMILARLY UNDER ALL ITS STATES, THE ENTITY DOES NOT ABANDON ITS CHARACTER OF SUBSTANCE'. IF IT WERE NOT SO, THEN THE COGNITION OF PAST AND FUTUBE THINGS WOULD BE OBJECT-LESS.-HOW AGAIN, IS IT THAT IT HAS BEEN ASSERTED BY Tâyin THAT COGNITION RESTS UPON THESE TWO ? - How AGAIN IS ACTION, WHICH IS PAST AND HAS NO FURTHER EXISTENCE, HELD TO BE PRODUCTIVE OF RESULTS ? HOW TOO COULD MYSTICS HAVE THE DISTINCT COGNITION OF PAST AND FUTURE