________________
"THE REVEALED WORD."
1153
This is true; but when we assert that Cognition is objectless, we do so, on accepting the view that Cognition is formless. One who holds Cognitions to be formless has got to provide an answer to the question that has been raised.
Even under the view that the form resides in the Cognition, the apprehension of the Object is explained on the basis of the idea that what is actually apprehended is that form of the Cognition which bears the imprint of the form of the Object. In the case of wrong Cognition there is no apprehension of the form of Cognition bearing the imprint of the Object; hence the Cognition is clearly objectless. Apart from being with form and being without form, there is no other alternative possible, in regard to the apprehension of things. Hence it follows that all Cognition, which is wrong, is objectless.-(24902493).
The following Text shows that in the case in question, there is no cause for mistake (wrong Cognition) :
TEXT (2494).
IT CANNOT BE RIGHT THAT THERE SHOULD BE A MANIFESTER',SPECIALLY FOR WHAT IS ETERNAL,IN ACCORDANCE WITH ITS EMBELLISHMENTS (AND MODIFICATIONS); CONSEQUENTLY THERE CANNOT BE DIVERSE COGNITIONS IN REGARD TO THE WORD.
SOUND.-(2494)
COMMENTARY.
In regard to Dhvani'-i.e. Word-Sound,--the diversity of the manijester is said to be the cause of the illusion that there is diversity in the sound also. But for anything that is eternal, there can be no 'manifester';'as in regard to eternal things, there is nothing that the Manifester can do; and unless it does something to it, it cannot be its 'Manifester'; if it were, there would be an absurdity; and anything could be the Manifester of anything.
For these reasons it cannot be right to hold that diverse Cognitions regarding the Word-Sound are due to the embellishments of the manifestor. - (2494).
It has been argued by the Mimāmsaka under Text 2170, that,"Just as the Lamp is regarded as the manifester of the Jar, through the aid that it affords to the Eye, etc. etc."
In the first of the following texts, the Author explains the opponent's position, and in the remaining texts, he sets forth the objections to it:
