________________
1564
TATTVASANGRAHA: CHAPTER XXVI.
TEXTS (3602-3605).
THE SUBJECT UNDER CONSIDERATION WAS THE STATEMENT THAT "THE
OXNISCIENT PERSON, BEING EXCLUDED FROM ALL THINGS, COULD NOT BE ABLE TO IMPART TEACHINGS" TO THIS, THE WISE MEN MADE THE ANSWER-'IF HE HAD NO POWER TO IMPART TEACHINGS, WHAT WOULD HAPPEN 1'-THE PROPER REJOINDER FOR YOU SHOULD KAVE BEEN THAT"IN THAT CASE THERE WOULD BE NO RELIABLE SCRIPTURE".-WHAT YOU HAVE ASSERTED IS—"IT MAY BE SO, BUT HAVE YOU SEEN HIM ACTUALLY SPEAKING ?"—NOW IF, IN THIS, YOU ARE URGING A Reductio ad Absurdum AGAINST US, THEN IT SHOULD ONLY MEAN AS YOLLOWS:"IF HIS SPRAKERSHIP IS NOT ADMITTED, THEN THERE COULD BE NO GETTING AT THE SCRIPTURE; HENCE IF THE SCRIPTURE COMPOSED BY HIM IS ADMITTED, Hrs speakership ALSO WILL HAVE TO BE ADMITTED."-(3602-3605)
COMMENTARY.
The Author thinks that the Opponent will say that "what I have asserted is only a Reductio ad Absurdum, and not an independent argument by itself", and consequently he proceeds to lend support to the idea that what the Opponent has urged is a Reductio ad Absurdum, with the words 'what you have asserted, etc. etc.- What you have asserted is that “Being excluded from all things, the Person could not have the capacity to teach"; in connection with this, you have to be asked-He may not have the capacity to teach, what is the harm in that ?-Being thus asked, what the Opponent would say, the Author himself state - The proper rejoinder for you should have been that in that case there would be no reliable Scripture'.-The answer to this rejoinder is-There may be no reliable Scripture, what is the incongruity in that 1-He has not been seen speaking, by which there would be incompatibility with a perceived fact.-Being thus questioned, you should have said "I am not proving His speakership after having myself seen that the Scripture had been composed by Him; you yourself regard your Scripture as composed by Him; and this is not possible if you do not admit His speaker ship; hence when you must insist upon the fact of the Scripture having been composed by Him, you must admit His speakership also".This is the undesirable contingency that is presented to the Buddhist by means of the Roductio ad Absurdum.-(3602-3605)
Having thus supported the idea of the Reductio ad Absurdum, the Author now proceeds to show how the putting forward of this Reductio ad Absurdum is not pertinent to the subject under consideration:
