________________
1330
TATTVASANGRAHA: CHAPTER XXV.
why should there be suspicion of invalidity regarding the initial cognition only, and not regarding the other cognition ?" Answer:
TEXTS (2967-2968). IN REGARD TO THE FIRST COGNITION, THERE ARE VARIOUS GROUNDS FOR SUSPECTING IT TO BE WRONG, SUCH AS (1) THE NON-PERCEPTION OF ITS EFFECT (IN THE SHAPE OF EFFECTIVE ACTION), (2) PERCEPTION OF SIMILARITY, (3) INEFFICIENCY OF THE COGNITION AND SO TORTH. WHEN, HOWEVER, THERE APPEARS THE COGNITION ENVISAGING ITS EFFECT, THERE ARE NO SUCH GROUNDS, BECAUSE THERE IS DIRECT PERCEPTION OF ACTION, WHICH IS DIRECTLY RELATED TO THE ENTITY
COGNISED.-(2967-2968)
COMMENTARY In connection with the initial cognition (of Fire), there are several grounds for suspecting it to be wrong; for instance, (1) immediately after the cognition, there does not come about its effect in the shape of Burning and the like, (2) it is similar to wrong cognitions, and (3) the inefficiency of the cognition ;- and so forth' includes unconcernediness, absence of repetition, etc.-In regard to the cognition of the effect, on the other hand, there is no reason to suspect it to be wrong; hence its confirmation comes from itself. (2967-2968)
In regard to the initial cognition also, when, by frequent repetition, etc. the grounds of suspicion have been dispelled, the validity comes by itself.This is what is pointed out in the following
TEXT (2969). IN THE CASE OF THE INITIAL COGNITION ALSO, EVEN THOUGH ITS EFFECT MAY NOT HAVE BEEN SEEN, IF THE COGNITION HAS BEEN REPEATED, A DISTINOT PECULIARITY IS PERCEIVED IN IT WHICH DIFFERENTIATES IT FROM COGNITIONS NOT PERTAINING TO THE THING CONCERNED, (AND
THIS ESTABLISHES ITS VALIDITY).
-(2969)
COMMENTARY. A particular cognition may appear as initially clear and distinct, with all grounds of suspicion regarding its invalidity dispelled by repeated experience; as is found in the case of mystics and in that of experts in gems and coins ; in the same manner, in other cases also, through repeated ex
