2023-06-22 12:07:47 by ambuda-bot
This page has not been fully proofread.
1
28
fearafare
object of any act, knowing oneself is not reasonable.
The relation between sight and the object seen cannot
be reasonably explained. The attributive-substantive
relation cannot be reasonably understood as one
of difference or non-difference. If knowledge is
held to be transient (non-eternal), the various indi-
vidual units of knowledge, their non-existence
-mutual, through destruction and before origination,
inherence, a universal of knowledgeness, have all to
be admitted making for a great complication. Holding
knowledge to be one leads to great simplicity; ideas
of different objects like "knowledge of a pot", "know-
ledge of a cloth " etc., being accounted for by the
association of different temporary adjuncts. Because
knowledge by itself is always understood uniformly
as knowledge only. Ideas regarding its orgination
and destruction can be reasonably explained by its
relation with objects that have to be constructed
necessarily.
५४. उपाधिपरामर्शमन्तरेण स्वत एव घटात् घटान्तरस्य भेदप्रतीतेः तत्प्रति
वन्दीग्रहासम्भवात् ।
52. Objection :-Because each pot'is perceived by itself
as different from another without reference to any
differentiating temporary adjuncts and there is no
possibility of perceiving any obstruction to it (why
should we not assume each knowledge as a distinct,
transient unit ?)
५३. आकाशकालदिशामपि नानात्वापत्तेश्च ।
53. Answer:-(In that case) space, time and direction
will have to be accepted as manifold.¹7
17 In the view of the Naiyāyika, who has raised the objec-
tion, these catagories are single, not manifold. His objection
would affect his own thesis adversly and is therefore invalid.
A
28
fearafare
object of any act, knowing oneself is not reasonable.
The relation between sight and the object seen cannot
be reasonably explained. The attributive-substantive
relation cannot be reasonably understood as one
of difference or non-difference. If knowledge is
held to be transient (non-eternal), the various indi-
vidual units of knowledge, their non-existence
-mutual, through destruction and before origination,
inherence, a universal of knowledgeness, have all to
be admitted making for a great complication. Holding
knowledge to be one leads to great simplicity; ideas
of different objects like "knowledge of a pot", "know-
ledge of a cloth " etc., being accounted for by the
association of different temporary adjuncts. Because
knowledge by itself is always understood uniformly
as knowledge only. Ideas regarding its orgination
and destruction can be reasonably explained by its
relation with objects that have to be constructed
necessarily.
५४. उपाधिपरामर्शमन्तरेण स्वत एव घटात् घटान्तरस्य भेदप्रतीतेः तत्प्रति
वन्दीग्रहासम्भवात् ।
52. Objection :-Because each pot'is perceived by itself
as different from another without reference to any
differentiating temporary adjuncts and there is no
possibility of perceiving any obstruction to it (why
should we not assume each knowledge as a distinct,
transient unit ?)
५३. आकाशकालदिशामपि नानात्वापत्तेश्च ।
53. Answer:-(In that case) space, time and direction
will have to be accepted as manifold.¹7
17 In the view of the Naiyāyika, who has raised the objec-
tion, these catagories are single, not manifold. His objection
would affect his own thesis adversly and is therefore invalid.
A