________________
"THE REVEALED WORD."
1009
TEXTS (2139-2140).
" AND IF THE WORD EXISTED FOR SUCH A LONG TIME, WHO COULD DESTROY IT AFTER THAT !--[Shlokavārtiku-ETERNALITY OF WORDS-367].FOR ANOTHER REASON AGAIN IT IS NOT POSSIBLE FOR THE WORD TO BE DESTROYED : IN THE CASE OF THE JAR AND OTHER THINGS, IT IS UNDERSTOOD THAT THEY WOULD BECOME DESTROYED EITHER THROUGH DECAY OR THROUGH SOME WEAPON, THERE IS NO SUCH CAUSE BY WHICH THE WORD COULD BE
DESTROYED."-(2139-2140)
COMMENTARY.
For such a long time', - i.e. during which time it denotes its own meaning after excluding so many other factors.
Says the Opponent : In the case of the Jar, etc. it is found that though they continue to exist for a long time, yet they come to be destroyed by the stroke of a stick or some such thing; the same may be the case with Word also.
The answer to this is "For another reason, etc. etc.".- Bhūyah' -again.
Things like the Jar undergo destruction either by decay or by the stroke of some weapon; there is no such cause for the destruction of the Word. - Why ?-Because the Word is incorporeal, while the Jar and other things are corporeal.-(2139-2140)
It has been declared (under Text 2131, above) as follows:- If the oneness of the Jar, that is urged as an undesirable contingency, is in reference to the Universal aspect, then the argument is superfluous.--If however, one were to urge the contingency of the Individual Jars being one, on the strength of the above arguments, then it can be pointed out that such an idea would be contrary to all Forms of Right Cognition :- What has been said there is equally applicable to the present case : For instance-If the one-ness urged is in regard to the Universal' aspect of the 'ga' and other letters (composing the word 'Gavh'), then it is superfluous, and so forth, all the rest of it may be repeated. Because in view of the diversity of Place, Time and Speaker, the Individual Letters—Ga and the rest are many; and it is in these that the Universal' Cow subsists; and in the same way, the Universal aspect of the letter 'ga' is held to subsist in the individual letter; so the two cases are exactly similar in all aspects (and on the same grounds that the individual jars cannot all be the same the individual word Cow', or the individual letter 'ga', cannot all be the same).
Anticipating this argument, the Mimāmsaka offers the following answer :