________________
1464
TATTVASANGRAHA: CHAPTER XXVI.
This certainty'-.e. the certainty of the Mimämsakas that "the Om. niscient Person does not exist ".-(3311)
The following assertion has been made by you Mimāmsakas"The Voda can make known such things as the past, the present, the future, the subtle, the hidden and so forth; which cannot be done by any other Senseorgan" (Shabara-Bhasya 1. 1. 2)-This is also a mere assertion without any reason, based upon sheer faith. This is what is shown in the following -
TEXT (3312).
THE ASSERTION THAT—"THE VEDA ALONE-AND NOTHING ELSEIS ABLE TO PROVIDE KNOWLEDGE OF THE PAST, ETC.-COULD BE TRUE ONLY IF THE NON-EXISTENCE OF THE OTHER
SOURCES WERE CERTAIN.-(3312)
COMMENTARY * Nothing else'-in the shape of Perception by the Omniscient Person and so forth.
The non-existence of other sources ' ; --if it were quite certain that the other source, in the shape of the Omniscient Person is non-existent,then alone, not otherwise, could it be reasonable to make the above assertion; as any such restriction would, under the circumstances, be meaningless.-(3312)
It has been argued by the Mimamsaka under Texts 3140-3141 that "By proving the existence of the Person knowing only Dharma and Adharma whom the Buddhist postulates, etc. etc.".
The answer to this is as follows:
TEXTS (3313-3314).
THE PROOF IN SUPPORT OF THE PERSON KNOWING PRIMORDIAL MATTER AND THE SPIRIT AND OTHER THINGS, AS ALSO OF THE PERSON KNOW. ING ALL THINGS, HAS BEEN ALREADY DECLARED BEFORE, AND LATER ON ANOTHER PROOF ALSO IS GOING TO BE SET FORTH. -HENCE IT IS NOT FOR NOTHING THAT PEOPLE TAKE THE TROUBLE OF PROVING THE EXISTENCE OF THE PERSON KNOWING THE MINUTE DETAILS OF THE WHOLE WORLD, BY MEANS OF ENTHUSIASTIC TREATISES AND DISCUS
SIONS.—(3313-3314)
COMMENTARY.
When we try to prove the existence of the Omniscient Person, we do not give up all considerations regarding that Person Himself; in fact our
