________________
1416
TATTVASANGRAHA: CHAPTER XXVI.
TEXT (3187). "TEERE IS NO SORIPTURAL DECLARATION AFFIRMING AN ETERNAL OMNISCIENT PERSON. HOW CAN ANY SUCH PERSON BE PROVED BY A DECLARATION THAT IS ARTIYICIAL AND NOT
TRUE?"-(3187)
COMMENTARY
That Cognition is verbal' which proceeds from Words, in regard to things not in close proximity to the man. It is of two kinds-that pro. duced by the eternal Word, and that produced by the utterances of men. As asserting the existence of the Omniscient Person, there is no eternal scriptural Word; hence the former verbal Cognition is not possible in this case. --What we read in the Upanişads regarding Him who is truthful in word, truthful in volution, truthful in desires-He should be sought after, He should be sought to be known, and so forth-all this should be under. stood to be merely commendatory.
As regards the human assertion that is quoted, such as The Blessed Lord the Tathāgata, the Arhat, is Truly Enlightened, etc., no reliability can attach to such assertions. How then could any reliable information be deduced from such an unreliable source 2(3187)
The following might be urged-We do not accept the Omniscient Person on the strength of any and every stray assertion; we do so on the strength of the assertions of that same Blessed Lord, such as-'I am omniscient, perceiving all things, there is nothing that is unknown to the Tathāg etc. oto'. Thus it is on His own word that we accept His omniscience,
The answer to this is as follows:
TEXT (3188)
"IF THE OMNISCIENT PERSON IS RECOGNISED AS SUCH ON THE STRENGTH OF HIS OWN WORD, HOW COULD THIS BE REGARDED AS ESTABLISHED, IN VIEW OF THE MUTUAL INTERDEPENDENCE OY
BOTH ?"-(3188)
COMMENTARY.
Under the circumstances, there would be an objectionable interdependence.-(3188)
How Bo?
Question Answer: