________________
EXAMINATION OF THE 'PERSON OF SUPER-NORMAL VISION'. 1521
ceiving things remote, concealed, etc.,--because they are human, because they are entities, because they are cognisable-like myself".
The answer to this is as follows:
TEXTS (3465-3466).
IF YOU DEDUCE THE INCAPACITY OF OTHER PERSONS, IN REGARD TO A CERTAIN EFFECT, FROM YOUR OWN EXAMPLE, ON THE BASIS OF SUCH REASONS AS 'BEING HUMAN' AND THE LIKE, -THEN YOU LAND YOURSELF IN ABSURDITIES.-IN THIS WAY, YOUR OWN STUPIDITY HAVING BEEN ASCERTAINED, FROM YOUR OWN EXAMPLE, ALL LEARNED MEN MIGHT BE
REGARDED AS STUPID.-(3465-3466)
COMMENTARY.
Nishchaya', 'deduce', is to be construed with Käryë', 'in regard to a certain effect'.
The Reasons cited are all 'Inconclusive'; as loading to absurdities.Because in this same manner, it may asserted as follows:-'All men are stupid, because they are human, etc. etc.,-like yourself'. And yet there can be no such deduction. Because Dharma is not found in one man, it cannot be deduced that it cannot be found in any man; because men are found to be differently circumstanced.-(3465-3460)
As rogards Rtuparna's assertion, quoted under Texts 3172-3173-to the effect that--"All men do not know all things, etc. etc."-that also is a mere assertion made without reasons.--This is what is pointed out in the following
TEXT (3467).
AS A MATTER OF FACT, THERE IS NO LIMIT TO THE KNOWLEDGE OF MAN. HENCE THE STATEMENT IN QUESTION IS A MERE ASSERTION
MADE WITHOUT ANY REASON.- (3467)
COMMENTARY.
Or, it may be that the statement made by Rtuparna is in regard to men like ourselves; in that case, there being no incompatibility between this view and our doctrine of the Omniscient Person, it has no bearing on the present discussion.-This is what is pointed out in the following
