________________
EXAMINATION OF THE 'PERSON OF SUPER-NORMAL VISION'. 1413
TEXTS (3181-3182).
"THUS THEN, WHEN THE BUDDHISTS, LIKE Pseudo-Mimāmsakas, ASSERT THE SIMILARITY OF Buddha AND OTHER PERSONS TO VEDIC SCHOLARS, ON THE GROUND OF ALL THESE BEING without beginning, THIS IS ONLY A FORM OF IGNORANCE, AND DOES NOT MAKE THEM EQUAL; BECAUSE EVEN SO, WHAT WOULD BE without beginning WOULD BE ONLY THE unreliability AND reliability OF THESE TWO SETS OF PERSONS (BUDDHA, ETC. AND VEDIO SCHOLARS) RESPECTIVELY."
-3181-3182)
COMMENTARY.
If the similarity that is pointed out between Buddha and others on the one hand and the Vedic Scholars on the other, is in regard to both being beginningless,—then our answer is that mere beginninglessness does not establish their reliability ; because neither reliability nor unreliability is incompatible with beginninglessness; all that would happen would be that beginninglessness would belong to the Reliability of Vedic Scholars, while it would belong to the Unreliability of Buddha and others; and neither Reliability nor Unreliability would belong to both, on the ground of beginning. lessness.-This is the upshot of the whole argument.-(3181-3182)
This game idea is further clarified by means of an example :
TEXTS (3183-3184).
“THE GOOD POINTS OF WHAT IS RELIABLE, AND THE BAD POINTS OF WHAT IS UNRELIABLE,—BOTH BEING beginningless,-ARE EQUAL ONLY IN SO FAR AS THEY ARE beginningless. FOR INSTANCE, REAL GOLD HAS BEEN IN USE SINCE TIME WITHOUT BEGINNING AND END, -50 HAS BEEN unreal GOLD ALSO; BUT • DO THE TWO BECOME EQUAL?" (3183-3184)
COMMENTARY.
* Pramāna, etc.'-The compound is to be expounded as the good and bad points of what is Reliable and what is Unreliable '.-(3183-3184)
Now the Vedic Scholar proceeds-(1) to refute the objection that "the Reason, in the shape of being amenable to non-apprehension, is inadmissible", -(2) to prove the non-existence of the omniscient Person, and (3) to prove that the case of the Veda is different :
43
