________________
1048
TATTVASANGRAHA: CHAPTER XXIV.
The following text points out that the idea that it is cognised as appearing at diverse places' is not concomitant with diversity', and hence there can be no validity attaching to it :
TEXT (2227).
"JUST AS THE SINGLE PERSON, Devadatta, PASSING FROM PLACE TO PLACE, ONE AFTER THE OTHER, DOES NOT BECOME DIFFERENT, --SO THE WORD-SOUND ALSO DOES NOT DIFFER (SIMPLY BECAUSE IT IS HEARD IN SEVERAL PLACES)."— (Shlokavārtika-ETER
NALITY OF WORDS, 198-1993.-(2227)
COMMENTARY.
So the Word-Sound also does not differ either in regard to time or to place', this has to be added.
Thus, the non-concomitance between the two (Diversity of Place of Appearance and Diversity of Sound) has been indicated through spacial non-comcomitance ; next, the Mimamsaka proceeds to point out the nonconcomitance of the two cognitions, spacial and chronological,—through chronological non-concomitance
TEXT (2228).
"AND AGAIN, THE SAME DEVADATTA, WHOSE ONE-NESS IS WELL KNOWN,
-WHEN SEEN AGAIN AND AGAIN, DOES NOT BECOME DIVERSE, ON ACCOUNT OF THE DIVERSITY OF TIME; SIMILARLY THE WORD-SOUND DOES NOT BECOME DIVERSE ON ACCOUNT OF THE DIVERSITY OF PLACE."- [Shlokavārtika,
ETERNALITY OF Words, 199-2003.-(2228)
COMMENTARY.
Jñataikatual whose unity is well known through Recognition !
"On acoount of the diversity in place' - this is by way of illustration; Sound does not become different on account of diversity of time either. By pointing one kind of non-concomitance, the other kinds of non-concomitance also become indionted. [That is why the Test has named place only.]-(2228)
