________________
1008
TATTVASANGRAHA : CHAPTER XXIV.
"Inconclusiveness
of the above
The following texts reject the Presumption :
TEXTS (2136-2138).
"INASMUCH AS THE WORD, HEARD BUT ONOR, ENVISAGES SEVERAL
UNIVERSALS' IN AN INDEFINITE FORM, IT CANNOT DEFINITELY POINT TO ITS OWN SPECIFIC DENOTATION, AS DISTINGUISHED FROM THE OTHER UNIVERSALS—(UNTIL IT HAS BEEN USED SEVERAL TIMES).-AS A MATTER OF FACT, THE WORD 'Cow' WOULD GET AT THE SPECIFIC DENOTATION OF THE PARTICULAR UNIVERSAL 'Cow' ONLY AFTER A LONG TIME WHEN IT HAS BEEN HEARD SEVERAL TIMES, AND HAS THEREBY EXCLUDED THE OTHER Universals-LIVING BEINGS', 'The quality or WHITINESS', The action OT MOVING ', THE Universals "DEWLAP', TAIL', AND ALSO THE Individuals, THE Cow OF VARIEGATED COLOUR', THE HORNLESS cow' AND THE LIKE, -WHICH ARE DIVERSE BY REASON OF THEIR INDIVIDUAL PROULIARITIES.”–{Shlokavirtika-ETERNALITY OF WORDS364-366)-(2136-2138)
COMMENTARY.
This has been thur explained in the Bhäşya (of Shabara, on Sit. 1. 1. 19) _" If the word 'Cow' is eternal, it is the same word that is uttered many times and has been previously heard also several times, as applied to other individual Cows; and thus by a process of positive and negative concomitance the Word comes to be recognised as denoting the particular Universal ; for this reason also, the Word must be eternal."
Individuals which are diverse, etc. etc.'-i.e. distinguished by their respective peculiarities; their diversity is based upon their being cognised ar different from one another. Hence the compound 'sannibandhanāḥ is to be expounded to mean which have their diversity based upon the cognition of their respective peculiarities'.
Having excluded' has to be construed with all these.- (2136-2138)
The following might be urged (against the Mimiimsalca) Tf the Word get at its denotation after a long time.-even so, how does it become proved that the Word exists for all time?
The answer to this is as follows :
