________________
" THE REVEALED WORD."
1005
“Or, (3) The subject of the Inference may be the notion of the word appearing to-day, being envisaged by the notion of the word that appeared yesterday' is the Probandum,- because it envisages the word' is the Probans; and the notion of the word appearing yesterday' is the Corroborative Instance.-This is the argument formulated in the words. This notion envisages, etc. etc.'-' this notion' stands for the notion appearing to-day. That'--the word Cow' apprehended by the Cognition of the word Cow' that appeared yesterday. For the same said reason '-i.e. because it envisages the word Cow'.
"Or, (4) Both-the notions appearing to-day and yesterday-envisage the same word, -because both envisage the word 'Cow'; like the notion of the single word 'Cow':--This argument is expressed in the words. Both, etc. etc.'. The Reason has not been stated in detail, as it is well-known.
"Or, (5) All notions of the universal Cow'—though divergent in regard to diversities of place, time, etc.—are produced by the same word
Cow', because they are notions of the Cow, like the notion of the single Cow.--In the previous argument, the Subject' (Minor Term) consisted of the notions envisaging the word 'Cow':-* envisaging the same object' being the Probandum ; while in the present argument, the notions envisaging the universal Cow' form the Minor Term.--and beng produced by the same word Cow is the Probandum ;-this is the difference between the two arguments.
“(6) The compound hyastanochcharana' means that which had its utterance yesterday';-this mentions the Minor Term ; existing to-day' is the Probandum. The rest is easily understood.
“(7) The word 'Cow that is heard to-day is the Minor Term was heard yesterday' is the Probandum.- Aforesaid', - i.e. because it is apprehended by the Cognition of the word Cow', is the Probans.
“Or, (8) 'all such words as are expressive' is the Minor Term their lasting for a long time' is the Probandum ;and because they bring about the cognition of the cognisable thing through the apprehension of relationships' is the Probans.-In the compound 'sambandhanubhavā, etc.' 'sambandhānubhāpēkşam' qualifies jñeyajñana pravartanam'; should be regarded as lasting'; for a long time' qualifies 'lasting'. The lasting character' meant here is in regard to time, not in regard to place, as in the case of mountains ;-this is what is intended to be indicated by the qualifying term for a long time':-Like the universal aspect of Smoke' is the Corroborative Instance; the specific individuality of things cannot have any continuity of existence or concomitance, hence it is the universal aspect' alone that can serve as the Corroborative Instance.
"(9) Cannot be evanescent';this states the same argument negatively.-- Because it must have, etc. etc.'.- Tādātvika'-till that time, i.e. till the time of use,- its 'nimitta ', -relationship-should continue." (2121-2130)
The following objection is raised-In this way, the Jar and such things also may be asserted to be one only. For instance, all notions of the individual Jar, though diverse through divergence of Place, Time, etc. must be regarded
