Tattva Sangraha Vol 2

SR No.: 007609
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Kamlashila, Ganganatha Jha
Publisher: Oriental Research Institute Vadodra
Publication Year: 1939
Total Pages: 887
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 84 MB

Page 330

" THE REVEALED WORD."
1055
Cognition, by embellishing either the Object or the Sense-organ; and as such, even when newly lit, it serves the purpose of illumining things. As regards the Word, on the other hand, directly it denotes only supersensuous things, and as such it cannot be an auxiliary to Perception. So that there is no analogy between the two cases.
Or (the meaning of the Text may be as follows)-What is auxiliary to Perception illumines things independently of the idea of any connection between the two (the illuminator and the illuminated) -.g. the Eye ; Light is auxiliary to Perception ;-hence, even when newly lit, it illumines things ;-Word, on the other hand, pertaining, as it does, to imperceptible things, is not auxiliary to Perception.-Hence there is a vast difference between the two cases (of the Lamp and of the Word).
Says the Opponent-Even & new Word would express the meaning through its similarity to a previously-known Word.
The answer is- So long as the similarity, etc. etc. - So long as the Similarity has not been actually recognised, the expressiveness of the Word cannot be due to it; otherwise there would be incongruities.-(2240).
Then again, the recognition of similarity may rest awhile ; as a matter of fact, no similarity is possible at all;this is what is explained in the following:
TEXTS (2241-2242).
“ WHICH PARTICULAR INDIVIDUAL WORD WOULD IT BE, THROUGH simi
larity TO WHICH ANOTHER WORD WOULD BE ASSUMED TO BE EXPRESSIVE? ALL THESE WORDS WOULD BE EQUAL, IN SO FAR AS NO ONE AMONG THEM HAS ITS CONNECTION WITH THE MEANING) PREVIOUSLY KNOWN.-IF IT BE HELD THAT THE WORD PERCEIVED (HEARD) FIRST OF ALL DID ACTUALLY HAVE A MEANING (AND THE EXPRESSIVENESS OF THE OTHERS WOULD BE DEPENDENT UPON THEIR SIMILARITY TO THAT WORD]', -THEN (THE ANSWER IS)-HOW COULD IT CONTINUE TO EXIST FOR SUCH A LONG TIME? AS A MATTER OF FAOT, A WORD IS NOT COMPREHENDED AS HAVING A MEANING UNTIL IT HAS BEEN HEARD TWICE OR THRICE.”-[Shlokavārtika-ETERNALITY OF WORDS, 249-250].—(2241-2242)
COMMENTARY
When one Word has been admitted to be expressive, others could be assumed to be expressive on the ground of their similarity to that Word ; but this is not possible ; because all Words are equally recognised as not connected with a meaning.