________________
574
TATTVASANGRAHA : CHAPTER XYI.
TEXTS (1107-1108). IF THE UNIVERSAL BLUE, OR THE QUALITY Blue, IS DENOTED BY THE WORD 'BLUE', THEN THE WORD "LOTUS' (PRONOUNCED WITH THAT WORD) SHOULD DENOTE ANOTHER UNIVERSAL'Lorus'; -SUCH BEING THE CASE, THERE WOULD BE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO WORDS, JUST AS THERE IS BETWEEN THE WORDS Balcula" (A KIND OF FLOWER) AND Utpala' (Lorus); SO THAT ANY CO-ORDINA. TION, ETC, BETWEEN THEM WILL BE ALL THE MORE IMPOS
SIBLE.-(1107-1108)
COMMENTARY. The compound anyềndivarajāti' is to be taken as & Karmādhāraya, - 'anyā' qualifying indivarajätih'.
- Vyavasēyā'i.e. should be denoted. • Utpalashruten' - has the Ablative ending.
Thus under this theory co-ordination would be all the more impossible ; since, like the words "bakula' and 'pala!, the words 'blue' and lotus would not be applicable to the same thing. There can be no such expression as bakulam upalam'-(1107-1108)
The following might be urged by the other party :-" Thongh the word blue denotes a particular Universal and a particular Quality, yet, through those, it also denotes the substance related to the Blue Quality and the 'Blue Universal ;-similarly the word 'lotus, through the Universal 'Lotus', denotes the substance in this way their application to the same thing being possible, there would be co-ordination between them ; which would not be possible in the case of the words "bakula and upala."
The answer to this is as follows:
TEXTS (1109-1110). IF IT IS THE SUBSTANOD RELATED TO THE QUALITY AND THE UNIVERSAL THAT IS DENOTED BY THE WORD 'BLUE', THEN THE WORD 'LOTUS WOULD BE USELESS. AS WHAT IS RELATED TO THE SAID TWO FACTORS (QUALITY AND UNIVERSAL) IS EXACTLY WHAT IS EQUIPPED WITH THE UNIVERSAL 'LOTUS '; AND AS THIS WILL HAVE BEEN ALREADY EXPRESSED BY THE WORD 'BLUE', THE WORD LOTUS 'WOULD BE USELESS.
(1109-1110)
COMMENTARY. The Quality'-called 'blue':-the Universal 'as the Universal blue'; that which is related to these is .Gunatajjātisambaddham!
