________________
EXAMINATION OF THE IMPORT OF WORDS.
571
TEXTS (1099-1101).
WE DO NOT HOLD THAT WHAT THE WORD DENOTES IS THE THING UNDOWED
WITH THE 'EXCLUSION (Apoha) OF OTHER THINGS'; BECAUSE FOR US, THERE IS NO EXCLUSION' OTHER THAN THE THING EXCLUDED FROM SOMETHING ELSE, HENCE THE OBJECTION THAT IT IS DEPENDENT UPON SOMETHING ELSE' IS NOT APPLICABLE TO THE 'DENOTATION OF WORDS' AS HONESTLY EXPLAINED, IN THE WAY THAT IT IS TO THE THEORY OF THE UNIVERSAL ' (BEING DENOTED BY WORDS). BECAUSE THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE Relation of qualification and qualified AND CO-ORDINATION CONSEQUENTLY THERE IS NO INCONGRUITY IN THE THEORY THAT IT IS Apoha THAT IS DENOTED BY WORDS.-(1099-1101)
COMMENTARY.
If excelsion were something entirely different from the Thing excluded, then there would be the possibility of the incongruity that has been urged against the view that 'what is denoted is the Thing as endowed with the Apoha". As a matter of foot however, for us, exclusion is not something different from the Thing excluded from others; in fact, it is the eccluded thing itself that is spoken of as 'exclusion', when what is meant to be stressed is the mere negation of other things.-Consequently, the incongruity that has been urged against the Denotation of Universals, --in the form that, if the Universal is what is primarily denoted by words, the denotation of the Thing endowed with that Universal would be dependent upon that (Universal), and consequently there being no indication of the varieties of the said Thing, there is no possibility of co-ordination or any other relationship with it, does not apply to the theory of Apoha, as there is no denotation (under this theory) of anything equipped with the 'Exclusion of other things', as something different.
This is what is meant by the words. Hence the objection, etc. etc.'. Tat- tasmāt'-Hence.
Avadātam, etc. etc, i.e. to the denotation of words as expounded by the Teacher Divinäge, with the purest conviction.
The grounds for this inapplicability are next stated- Because there is no difference, etc. etc.'.-That is, there the Denotation of words in the shape of the Exclusion of other things'is not different from, -not anything other than that which is excluded from others,
Qualification and qualified, etc. etc... This is easily understood. - (1099-1101)
The following Texto show how co-ordination, etc. is not incompatible:
