________________
EXAMINATION OF THE IMPORT OF WORDS.
491
the form that is connected with these two,-i.e, which figures in these ; when the two persons-the Speaker and the Hearer-think of the object as so figuring,—then the Word comes to be applied to that external object. That is to say, though in reality what the speaker is cognisant of is what is figuring in his own consciousness, yet he thinks that he is speaking to the other man of an external object; and the Hearer also has the impression that this man is speaking to me of an external object; hence, just as two men suffering from defective vision see two moons, so also is all this use of words."
If this is so, then, you have fallen on our side ; and all your argumentation is futile.
Again',-i.e. once you had come to our side when you postulated the "Intuition as the 'Import of words '.
It is thus established that the Reason (put forward by the Author) * because no Convention can be made ', -cannot be regarded as 'unproven. The idea that it may be 'Inconclusive' or Contradictory' has been already rejected before.-From all this it follows that all that is brought about by words is the 'Apoha!, Exclusion of others'.-(909)
On hearing the term Apoha', the other party, having his mind perturbed, and not knowing the exact nature of this Apoha, proceeds to urge against that doctrine the fact of its being contrary to experience
TEXTS (910-911).
"WHY DO YOU SAY THAT THE WORD BRINGS ABOUT THE EXCLUSION
OF OTHERS'? As A MATTER OF FACT MERE NEGATION IS NOT APPREHENDED IN THE IDEA BROUGHT ABOUT BY THE WORD; ON THE CONTRARY, IN THE CASE OF ALL SUCH WORDS AS 'Cow!, Gavaya', 'ELEPHANT', 'TREE' AND SO FORTH,—THE VERBAL COGNITION THAT RESULTS IS ALWAYS IN THE POSITIVE
FORM."
COMMENTARY.
The particle 'iti' is to be taken as understood after anyāpohakrt. The meaning is-"Why do you say that what is brought about by the word is the exclusion of others !"
Why should not this be asserted ?
* Because, as a matter of fact, mere negation, etc. etc.; that is, the exclusion of others' is intended to be a mere negation; and mere negation does not figure in Verbal Cognition ; on the contrary, Verbal Cognition is always found to apprehend the positive form of things, and what does not figure in Verbal Cognition cannot be rightly regarded as the import of words'; as such an idea would lead to absurdities. Thus the Proposition (of the Apohist) is contrary to experience."-(910-911)
