Book Title: Tattva Sangraha Vol 2
Author(s): Kamlashila, Ganganatha Jha
Publisher: Oriental Research Institute Vadodra

Previous | Next

Page 713
________________ 1438 TATTVASANGRAHA: CHAPTER XXVI. The answer to this is Nor have several divergent, etc. etc. This has to be construed with 'na drutal, changed from the drstam', of the previous clause. As a matter of fact, several Cognitions in the same Chain' of a Cognition have never been found to appear. [Several lines of the text are missing here.] [The Buddhist's answer to the Mimamsaka's arguments against the Omniscient Person,- embodied in Tests 3128-3261.) TEXTS (3262-3263). THUS HAVE THE Mimāmsakas ARGUED, BEING FIRM BELIEVERS IN THE SELF-SUFFICIENCY OF THE VEDA.-BUT WE HAVE ALREADY PROVED IN DETAIL THAT THE VEDA IS THE WORK OF A PERSON. HENCE THE CONCLUSION IS IRRESISTIBLE THAT THERE IS A PERSON WHO HAS THE DIRECT KNOWLEDGE OF ALL THINGS ; AND NO ONE CAN KNOW THINGS BY MEANS OF THE ETERNAL WORD, WHICH IS AN IMPOSSI BILITY.-(3262-3263) COMMENTARY. Thus the conclusion is that there is a Person who perceives things directly by Himself, not through the Eternal Word '; because the 'Eternal Word ' is an impossibility. The 'ava' after drasta should be construed after säksät'-(3262. 3263) It may be possible to have the Eternal Word '; even so, however, it cannot be right to accept it as a means of knowing supersensuous things.This is what is pointed out in the following: TEXT (3264). THE ETERNAL WORD CAN NEVER HAVE THE CAPACITY TO BRING ABOUT THE COGNITION OF ITS OWN MEANING BECAUSE THERE IS INCOMPATIBILITY BETWEEN SUCCESSION' AND 'SIMUL TANEITY':-(3264) COMMENTARY. Its own meaning what is expressed by the word.-Or, sva' (in svärtha ') may stand for the self', the nature, of the Word and 'artha' for what is expressed by it ; so the compoundsvärthajtana' would mean 'the Cognition of the Word itself and its meaning'. For the bringing about of such cognition, the capacity of the 'Eternal Word ' could be either inherent in itself, or due to other contributory causes. It cannot be inherent in it; because in the matter of an Eternal Thing bringing about its effect, there is incompatibility between succession and simultaneity;

Loading...

Page Navigation
1 ... 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 770 771 772 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 801 802 803 804 805 806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 814 815 816 817 818 819 820 821 822 823 824 825 826 827 828 829 830 831 832 833 834 835 836 837 838 839 840 841 842 843 844 845 846 847 848 849 850 851 852 853 854 855 856 857 858 859 860 861 862 863 864 865 866 867 868 869 870 871 872 873 874 875 876 877 878 879 880 881 882 883 884 885 886 887