________________
EXAMINATION OF THE 'PERSON OF SUPER-NORMAL VISION'. 1523
This is what has been declared in Texts 1853-1855 under the chapter on the 'Three points of Time'-[For translation see, in loco, above)-(3473)
The above is not accepted by the Sautrāntika (section of Buddhists), who hold that the Blessed Lord has the direct perception of all things. Hence the Author sets forth the view of the Sauträntika in the following
TEXT (3474). OR, THROUGH THE POWERS OF YOGA, THE MENTAL PERCEPTION OF MYSTICS WOULD CLEARLY ENVISAGE THE PAST AND THE FUTURE ALSO, INDEPENDENTLY OF INFERENCE AND THE WORD.
-(3474)
COMMENTARY.
When one has a true dream, even though the cognition is object-Joss, yet it is there, independently of Inference and Word,-appearing through the peculiar nature of its substratum, and it is in conformity with the real state of things. In the same manner, in the case of mystios, through the powers of Meditation and Communion, the Past and the Future thing becomes clearly perceptible, independently of Inference and Word. This Perception is held to be a valid proof (of omniscience).-(3474)
The following might be urged-"Perception has been held to envisage the Specific Individuality of things; there is no Specific Individuality that is Past or Future; then how can the knowledge of these envisage the Specific Individuality"?
The answer to this is as follows:
TEXTS (3475-3476).
As APPREHENDING ITS OWN MANIFESTATION, IT ENVISAGES A Specific Individuality; AND AS ENVISAGING A CLEAR AND DISTINCT MANIFESTATION, IT IS HELD TO BE Perception. -THUS THERE is SOME ONE WHO PERCRIVES SUPERSENSUOUS THINGS DIRECTLY. AND AS THERE IS NO ETERNAL WORD, ONE DOES NOT PERCEIVE ANYTHING THROUGH THAT.
(3475-3476)
COMMENTARY.
Though it is true that there is no Specific Individuality that is Past or Future, yet, inasmuch as the cognition apprehends itself, it has been declared in the scriptures to be envisaging the Specific Individuality; hence there is no incongruity in this.
