________________
1378
TATTVASANGRAHA: OHAPTER XXV.
It has been argued under Text 2915, that "Invalidity does not become recognised on any other grounds; at the time that it appears, it is always recognised as valid, etc. etc.".
The answer to this is as follows:
TEXTS (3102-3103).
IT CANNOT BE RECOGNISED THAT IT IS VALID AT THE TIME THAT IT APPEARS; -BECAUSE IT IS NON-CONCEPTUAL AND BECAUSE SELF-COGNITION IS NOT ADMITTED.-NOR CAN IT BE RECOGNISED BY ANOTHER COGNITION ; BECAUSE IT IS NOT THERE AT THE TIME ; ALSO BECAUSE ITS PRESENCE IS NOT MANIFESTED; OR BECAUSE OF AN UNDESIRABLE CONTINGENOY.
-(3102-3103)
COMMENTARY.
At the time that the Cognition appears (comes about)-(a) is it recognised by itself that it is valid ? Or (6) is it so recognised by another Cognition, appearing at the same time? Or (e) by another Cognition, appearing at another timo 9-These are the three alternatives possible.
(a) The Cognition cannot be recognised by itself, as valid ; because, as regards themselves, all Cognitions are non-conceptual (indeterminate), and hence any such notion as that this is valid ' is impossible.
(6) Nor is the apprehension of a Cognition by another Cognition admitted (by the other party); because it has been held that Cognition is always uncognisable.
Nor can the Cognition be cognised by another Cognition, appearing at the same time; because two Cognitions can never appear at the same time.
Nor can it becognised by another Cognition, appearing at another time; because if there be no Cognition of this other Cognition-what is cognised by that third Cognition cannot be known; so that the Cognition cognised by that third Cognition would be one whose manifestation has not been manifested ; and if it be held that this also is cognised by yet another Oognition, there would be an Infinite Regress.-(3102-3103)
It has been argued under Text 2916, that-"Even in cases where the falsity is explained to others, these two ideas have to be pointed out, and not mere similarity".
The answer to this is as follows:
