________________
* THE REVEALED WORD."
1167
is that what I call connection is called by you coming within range';. there is no other difference".
This is not right. What is called by us coming within range is becoming the Cause ;-not Connection. Because when the Eye produces Cognitions, the Object-Colour, etc.-becomes its auxiliary, and hence called its objective'; and it is not called so because it comes into contact with it. The purpose served by the aid provided by auxiliaries is of two kinds(1) mutual benefit, e.g. between the Light-rays and the thing within cover, and (2) serving the same purpose ; e.g. when the man sees Colour immediately on opening his Eyes-In both ways, the Object of the Cognition is so called because it is its peculiar Cause, and not because it is connected with it.
"This same restriction or specification of the Cause would not be possible without some Connection."
Not so; because the necessary restriction is secured by the capacity of the Cause itself. In fact when the Cause is produced out of its own Cause, it is produced exactly in the form in which only some of it becomes productive of the Cognition, not all; because the difference among all things is due to the difference in their Causes.-Just as under your view,-even though the Connection is equally present in both cases, why is it that the Eye apprehends the Colour only, not the Taste 2-It might be argued that "the Taste is not apprehended because it is not connected with the Eye"-Why should not the same Connection be present in the case of Taste also 2-as the locus of both (Taste snd Colour) is the same; and there is nothing to restrict the Connection (to Colour only), whereby, even though residing in the same locus, the Eye comes up to the Colour only and not to the Taste, though this also is present at the same place, and also it does not come up to the Colour also if it is very remote.
It might be urged that "the restriction would be due to its own Cause".
This can be said also under the view that the Eye is operative without contact-Enough of this discussion.-(2523)
The following Text anticipates and answers an objection from the other party
TEXT (2524).
"HOW CAN THERE BE A SINGLE OBJECTIVE BASIS FOR COGNITIONS WHICH APPEAR AS DIVERSE ?”-IF THIS IS URGED, THEN (THE ANSWER IS THAT THE SAME OBJECTION. AS AGAINST THE UPHOLDERS OF THE EXTERNAL WORLD, IS EQUALLY APPLICABLE TO
THE COGNITIONS OF COLOUR ALSO.-(2524)
COMMENTARY. "How can there be a single object for Cognition which appears as diverse ?"
