________________
EXAMINATION OF THE PERSON OF SUPER-NORMAL VISION'. 1439
and apart from these, there is no other method possible whereby there could be effective action; as the two (succession and simultaneity) are mutually exclusive. Hence all effective action must be invariably concomitant with succession and simultaneity.
Now, in the case of the Eternal World', it cannot bring about the Cognition of its meaning in succession ; because at the time that the first effect is being brought about, the cause would not have lost its capacity to bring about the subsequent effects (Cognitions); so that all these should appear, all at the same time. Nor is it possible for these effects to be brought about in succession ; because even at the later moment, just as at the moment of the bringing about of the first effect--the efficiency of the cause would be there intact, and hence there would be an incongruity if it did not bring about the first effect over again. This argument may be formulated as follows:- When a thing is devoid of a wider character, it must be devoid of the less wide character ;-e.g. the Jar, which is devoid of the character of * tree', is devoid of the character of 'shimshapa' (a particular tree); the 'Eternal Word' called Veda is devoid of the character of succession and simultaneity' which includes under itself the character of effective action' ;-hence, by implication, there is non-apprehension of the wider character. Thus it is not possible for the 'Eternal Word' to have the said capacity inherent in itself.
Nor can the said capacity be due to any other contributory cause. Because the capacity being nothing apart from its very nature, cannot, like this nature, be brought about by any such cause. Even if there were some such cause, any relationship to it would be impossible. This has been discussed several times.
Thus then, the idea of the Cognition of supersensuous things being due to the 'Eternal Word', being rejected by Inference, cannot be accepted.(3264)
It has been argued that—“The Perceiver of Dharma cannot exist, because the only means of Cognition by which his existence can be envisaged is 'Non-apprehension' (Negation)."
In answer to this, the Buddhist is going to show from the other party's own point of view, that this Proposition that there can be no Perceiver of Dharma' is annulled by Presumption, and the Reason adduced ("because envisaged by non-apprehension ') is Inadmissible :
TEXTS (3265-3267).
FROM THIS IT FOLLOWS THAT THINGS LIKE HEAVEN, SACRIFICE AND THE
LIKE HAVE BEEN SPOKEN OF BY THE PERSON WHO KNEW THEM BY HIMSELF. IN FACT, UNDER YOUR VIEW ALSO THE AUTHOR OF THE VEDA WOULD BE SUCH A PERSON CAPABLE OF PERCEIVING SUPERSENSUOUS THINGS OR A PERSON WHO KNOWS ALL ABOUT PRIMORDIAL MATTER, SPIRIT AND OTHER THINGS; OR ONE WHO KNOWS OF ALL THINGS.-IN FACT, IF SUCH AN AUTHOR WERE NOT
