________________
928
TATTVASANGRAHA: CHAPTER XXII.
TEXT (1944).
BECAUSE THE CONCEPTUAL COGNITION OF THE SAT PERSONS IS BORN OF THE FRUTTION OF THE IMPRESSIONS LEFT BY THE REPEATED COGNITION OF THE NAME DURING THAT SAME BIRTH, -THEREFORE ANOTHER BIRTH' BECOMES
ESTABLISHED.-(1944)
COMMENTARY. • Name-verbal expression. Cognition apprehension, knowledge : - abhyasa', repeated appearance.
The compound 'yannāma, etc. eto.' is to be expounded as 'that birth during which there has been reported cognition of the Name',-this compound being in accordance with a particular rule (of Pāņini's) - Saptami, etc. ' ;-the impressions are left by this repeated Cognition these Impressions have this "fruition', development, attainment of their full character, by producing their effects and it is from this fruition that the said Conceptual Cognition is born.
of the said persons '-.e. of new-born infants. (1944)
The following Text sets forth the opponent's Reductio ad absurdum argument against the above view :
TEXT (1945).
"IF THE SAID CONCEPTUAL COGNITION OF THE NEWBORN INFANTS PROCEED FROM THE REPEATED COGNITION OF NAMES, HOW IS IT THAT THEY DO NOT HAVE THE MEMORY OR THE CLEAR
SPEECH OF ELOQUENT SPEAKERS?"-(1945)
COMMENTARY.
"If the Conceptual Cognition proceeds from the repeated Cognition of the Convention during previous lives, then the newborn child should have remembrance of the past Convention; because the continuity of a habit could not be possible without remembrance; also the child should have clear speech like eloquent speakers and in that case, there would be no need for the setting up of any Conventions during the present life. And yet none of these things happens. Hence it follows that, as there is no Remembrance, and there is no clear speech, the idea that the Conceptual Cognition is preceded and produced by repeated Cognition is incompatible with facts".
By means of this Reductio ad absurdum, which rejects the very nature of the Major Term, the Opponent shows that the final Oonclusion (of the Buddhist) is defective.-(1945)
In the following Text, the author points out that the Reason put forward in this Reductio ad absurdum is 'Inconclusive' (Doubtfal) -