I'm translating a passage about rebirth from the Milindapanha (more exactly
Addhaanavaggo I: Dhammasantatipa~nho), that says:
tena na ca so, na ca a~n~no, purimavi~n~naa.ne pacchimavi~n~naa.na.m
sa.ngaha.m gacchatii"ti
I. B. Horner translates this passage as following:
consequently neither the one [dhamma] nor another is reckoned as the last
consciousness
My doubt is about rendering "purimavi~n~naa.ne pacchimavi~n~naa.na.m" as
"the last consciousness". Wouldn't it rather be translated as something
like:
consequently, neither the one [dhamma], nor another, it is reckoned [just]
as the former and the latest consciousness
This way, it would mean that the flow of phenomena (dhammasantati) is
not to be regarded as the same or an entirely different object moving
through time, but an effect of two moments of consciousness artificially
linked by the mind.
Maybe my doubt here is due to misunderstanding about the role
vi~n~naa.na is playing on this context, so any clarifications are welcome.