________________
1144
TATTVASANGRAHA: CHAPTER XXIV.
The Author supplies the prooi for the statement just made in 2462) regarding the fact that the diversity among Cognitions is proved by their appearing in succession, as in the case of the Virgin':
TEXT (2465).
ALL THESE COGNITIONS OF THE Cow-WORD, WHICH APPEARED YESTERDAY AND TO-DAY, CANNOT ALL ENVISAGE THE SAME OBJECT.--LIKE THE SUCCESSIVELY APPEARING COGNITIONS OF COLOUR
AND ODOUR, ETC.-(2465)
COMMENTARY.
The argument may be thus formulated -Those Cognitions that appear in succession do not envisage the same object,-e.g. the Cognitions of Taste, Colour, etc. appearing one after the other all these cognitions of the Cowwords that appeared yesterday and to-day have appeared in succession hence there is apprehension of the wider contrary.- (2465)
The following Text shows that neither of the Reasons just adduced by the Buddhist is 'Inconclusive
TEXT (2466).
IF IT WERE NOT SO, THEN ALL COGNITIONS WOULD HAVE ONE AND THE SAME OBJECT ; THERE WOULD BE INCONGRUITY ALSO AS REGARDS THEIR APPEARING IN SUCCESSION, WHEN THEIR EFFI. CIENT CAUSE IS THERE ALL THE TIME,
-(2466)
COMMENTARY
Of all cognitions -i.e. of the cognitions of Taste, Colour and so forth. -The possibility of all having the same object, though appearing diverselyis the argument that annuls the Reason in question.
Incongruity as regards appearing in succession would annul the reason because they appear in succession':-(2466)
It has been argued by the Mimāmsaka, under Text 2133, that," If the relationship in question were artificial, etc. etc.".
The answer to that is as follows: