________________
556
TATTVASANGRAHA: CHAPTER XVI.
TEXT (1059). IF IT BE HELD THAT THAT ALONE HAS THE CAPACITY TO MANIFEST IT -THEN, EVEN THOUGH THE SUBSEQUENT DETERMINATH JUDGMENT IS THE SAME, THAT ALONE HAS THE CAPACITY TO PRODUCE IT, AND NOT THE Horse.-(1059)
COMMENTARY. Manifest it'-.e. the particular Universal Cow! * That alone',- i.e. the Variegated and other Cowe, not the Horse.
If that be so, then, even when there is diversity, and there is no Commonalty, the variegated and other cows alone, not the Horse would have the capacity to bring about the determinate judgment; even though this judgment would be the same. This view of ours also would not be incompatible.-(1059)
Question :-"What is the upshot of all this?" Anstver
TEXT (1060) THUS THEN, IN WHATEVER THING THE SAID DETERMINATE JUDGMENT IS PRESENT TO THAT THE EXCLUSION OF THE NON-COW 'BECOMES APPLICABLE-EVEN IN THE ABSENCE OF THE UNIVER
SAL 'cow'-(1060)
COMMENTARY. In whatever thing-Variegated Cow, eto.--the said determinate judgment is present-in the form 'this is a Cou", that is a Cow', -to that, -even in the absence of the Universal Cow', as a positive entity--the exclusion of the non-Cow', in the form of the Reflection becomes applied.-(1060)
It has been argued above (under Text, 939, by Kumārila) that "The Exclusion of the non-Cow is not apprehended, at first, by the Sense-organs, etc etc".
The following Tects show that this statement is not admissible :
TEXTS (1061-1062). THAT THING WHICH IS DIFFERENT FROM THE non-cow' IS CERTAINLY APPREHENDED BY THE SENSE-ORGANS, THE REFLECTION ALSO WHICH IS SUPERIMPOSED UPON IT IS APPREHENDED BY ITS OWN COGNITION. IT IS ON NOTICING THIS THAT PBOPLE USE THE WORD; THE RECOGNITION OF ITS RELATION ALSO BEOOMES CLEARLY EXPLAINED
ON THE SAME BASIS.-(1061-1062)
COMMENTARY, The Apoha in the shape of the Specifio Individuality' is apprehended through the sense-organs themselves.
