________________
EXAMINATION OF THE PERSON OF SUPER-NORMAL VISION'. 1569
TEXT (3625). THAT THERE IS NO SIMULTANEOUS COGNITION IN THE CASE OF PLEASURE AND PAIN-THAT SHOULD BE UNDERSTOOD TO BE DUE TO THE REQUISITE CAUSE BEING ABSENT; THERE IS NOTHING
INCOMPATIBLE IN IT.-(3625)
COMMENTARY. 'Should be understood';—That Pleasure and Pain are not cognised at one and the same time is due to the fact that they do not appear at one and the same time, on account of the causes of both not being present,--not on account of any incompatibility.--This is what should be understood to be the case.—What is meant is that the cause of the non-cognition of both lies in the absence of their causes, not in their mutual incompatibility.-(3625)
In the case of those things also where the Incompatibility is real,and not merely conceptual, as in the case of Pure and Impure,--there is figuring in the same cognition.--This is what is shown in the following
TEXT (3626). THE VARIOUS COLOURS,-BLUE, YELLOW, WHITE, ETC.-THOUGH MUTUALLY INCOMPATIBLE, ON ACCOUNT OF THE DIFFERENCES OF PLACE, ORIGIN, ETC.--ARE ACTUALLY SEEN AT ONE
AND THE SAME TIME.-(3626)
COMMENTARY. The construction is-'incompatible, on account of the differences of place, origin, etc.'— Difference of place consists in both not occupying the same point in space;-'difference of origin or nature'-'nature' in the shape of the Blue, etc. and 'origin' in the shape of the blue components.-(3626)
It has been argued under Test 3250,- "Who can apprehend each one of the endless things, past, present and future, even in hundreds of years ?”
The answer to this is as follows:
TEXT (3627). THE OMNISCIENT PERSON WHOSE EXISTENCE WE HAVE ESTABLISHED IS ONE WHO COMPREHENDS WITHIN A SINGLE COGNITIVE MOMENT THE ENTIRE ROUND OF ALL THAT IS TO BE KNOWN; IT IS FOR THIS REASON THAT NO succession IS ADMITTED IN THIS CASE.
—(3627)
COMMENTARY. * In this connection some people belonging to our own party, while sup. porting the opinion of the Idealist, argue as follows:-If the entire round of cognisable things is embraced within a single cognitive moment, then that would imply a limit on the number and extent of things; and this would militate against the accepted idea that the number and extent of things
