________________
EXAMINATION OF THE IMPORT OF WORDS
531
TEXTS (995-996).
"Is This Apoha ONE AND THE SAME IN CONNECTION WITH ALL THINGS? OR IS IT SEVERAL I-IF ONE, THEN, BEING RELATED TO SEVERAL
COWS, IT WOULD BE THE SAME AS THE UniversalCow':-IF IT IS SEVERAL, THEN IT WOULD BE ENDLESS, -LIKE SO MANY INDIVIDUAL OB. JECTS. CONSEQUENTLY, JUST LIKE THE DIVERSE INDIVIDUALS, THIS ALSO COULD NOT BE DENOTED' -
(995-996)
COMMENTARY.
[Uddyotakara continues]—"You should explain whether this Apoha is one and the same in regard to all things? Or is it different with each individual thing? If it is one and the same, and is related to several cows, then it is the same as the Universal Cow. If on the other hand, it is many (differing with each individual cow), then it is as endless as the individual objects themselves ; so that no conception of it would be possible; which means that it cannot be denoted."-(995-996)
TEXTS (997-1000).
THIS Apoha. EXCLUSION OF OTHER THINGS '-IS IT ITSELF denoted Or not-denoted ? EVEN IF IT is denoted, IS IT DENOTED AS SOME THING positive ? OR ONLY AS THE 'NEGATION OF OTHER THINGS? -IF IT IS DENOTED AS SOMETHING positive, THEN YOU SHOULD ABANDON YOUR EXTREMIST VIEW, WHEREBY IT HAS BEEN ASSERTED THAT'in every case it is the exclusion of other things THAT IS DENOTED BY WORDS.'-IF, ON THE OTHER HAND, THE SAID'EXCLUSION (Apoha) IS DENOTED IN THE FORM OF THE 'EXCLUSION OF OTHER THINGS,THEN SUCH A VIEW WOULD INVOLVE AN INFINITE BEGRESS.
-IP THEN IT BE HELD BY YOU THAT THE SAID Apoha (EXCLUSION OF OTHER THINGS) IS not denoted, THEN YOUR ASSERTION, THAT *THE WORD ALWAYS BRINGS ABOUT THE EXCLUSION OF OTHER THINGS, WOULD BECOME ANNULLED."-(997-1000)
COMMENTARY
* You have to be questioned-is this Apoha denoted or not denoted! If it is denoted, is it denoted as something positive? Or as the 'exclusion of other things I-If it is denoted as something positive, then the assertion that "The denotation of words consists in the exclusion of other things'.
