________________
"THE REVEALED WORD."
1237
appearance concealed, how can they appear ? Because 'appearance' is of the nature of apprehension.--(2727)
Then again, if it were possible for what is past to continue to exist, then what is asserted might be true; as a matter of fact however, what is past does not continue to exist; hence the said appearance of the Letters in the Cumulative Cognition cannot be right. This is what is pointed out in the following:
TEXT (2728).
SUCH CONTINUANCE, HOWEVER, HAS BEEN ALREADY REJECTED; IF THERE WERE SUCH CONTINUANCE, THEN THE REMEMBRANCE SHOULD APPEAR AT THE TIME OF THE COGNITION OF THE APPREHENSION OF THE LETTERS; BECAUSE THE TWO WOULD HAVE ONE
AND THE SAME CAUSE.-(2728)
COMMENTARY.
* Already'--.e. under the Chapter on the Three Points of Time'.
In support of this he adduces an argument annulling the Opponent's idea - If there were such continuance, etc. etc.;-at the very time when there is cognition of the apprehension of the Letters, there would be the likelihood of the Remembrance appearing. This is the argument that sets aside the Mimāmsaka's view.
Having the same cause '-Their causes are not different.-(2728)
The Grammarians urge the following objection-" If there is no such single entity as the 'Sphota', of the nature of the Word, -then how is it that on the utterance of the word 'go", ("Cow'), there appears the single cognition in the one form of 'gauh' (and not in that of the component letters)?”
The answer to this is as follows:
TEXT (2729). WE ARE NOT OBJECTING TO THE SINGLE COGNITION IN THE FORM OF 'gauh', THE Cow; BUT THE NOTION OF Oneness REGARDING THE WORD IS DUE TO THE FACTS—(1) THAT IT IS APPREHENDED BY A SINGLE IDEA AND (2) THAT IT DENOTES A SINGLE THING.
(2729)
COMMENTARY.
Ekamatitva --the fact of there being a single cognition.
"Tadgrāhyaika, etc. etc. It is apprehended by a single cognition, and it serves a single purpose.--The compound being of the Copulative
32