________________
952
TATTVASANGRAHA: CHAPTER XXIIT.
TEXT (2007).
THE FOLLOWING IDEA MAY BE ENTERTAINED-"THE SWORD AND THE FORE, THOUGH NOT OF THE FORM OF THE ELEPHANT AND THE INFLAMMABLE OBJECT, DO THE CUTTING AND THE BURNING: OF THOSE OBJECTS ; IN THE SAME WAY WOULD THIS (COGNITION) ALSO DO (THE APPREHENDING OF THE OBJECT,
WITHOUT ASSUMING ITS FORM)."—(2007)
COMMENTARY. The genitive ending in 'dantidāhyādeh' is in connection with chhedadahādi'.
This i.e. the Cognition.
The torin'di' includes such other cases as the Law illuminating the Blue and other things.-(2007)
The following Text provides the answer to the abovo:
TEXT (2008).
THERE IS NO ANALOGY (BETWEEN THE TWO CASES); BECAUSE THE THINGS CITED ARE PRODUCTIVE OF THE OTHER OBJECT IN THAT FORM, AND HENCE ARE KNOWN AS SUCH ; WHILE COGNITION
IS NOT PRODUCTIVE IN THE SAME WAY.-(2008)
COMMENTARY.
The Sword is productive' of the Elephant, and is, on that account, known as the Cutter'; what happens is that when the Elephant is struck by the Sword, there is produced an Elephant with sundered limbs; similarly when the Fuel is touched by Fire, it becomes produced as the Live-coal; in the same manner, the Jar and other external things also become capable of producing cognitions, through Light. But even so, the Cognition does not confer any benefit upon the Object; on the contrary it is the Object that produces the Cognition in a clear form. When, thus, the Cognition does not confer any benefit upon the Object, -how could it be its Cogniser'1The mere fact of the Cognition being the product of the Object cannot justify the idea that it is 'Cognisant' of that Object; as otherwise, the Cognition might be regarded as Cognisant of the Eye and other means of Cognition also.-(2008)
Bhadanta-Shubhagupta has argued as follows:
* Even though not assuming the form of the Object, the Cognition does apprehend it, because it is of the nature of the apprehension of that Obiect: hence no question should be raised as to how it apprehends it and like what it apprehends it. This has been thus asserted- If the Cognition does apprehend the Object, then it is of the nature of the apprehension of