________________
"THE REVEALED WORD."
1141
and this order in the manifesters-i.e. in the Palate and other speech-centres, -is dependent upon the whim of man, and hence cannot be fixed; as there, can be no restraint on the whim of man. Consequently, there is no reasonable ground for believing that in any set of words- Shanno dēvih, etc.'—the order has been and is going to be always the same; hence it is just possible that the order may be otherwise also.-(2454)
It has been argued by the Mimāmsaka, in Text 2119, that "Even though the Flame is momentary, yet there is Recognition, etc. etc."
The answer to that is as follows:
TEXT (2455). THE IDEA OF ANY SUCH UNIVERSAL ' AS 'FIRE' HAS BEEN REJECTED IN DETAIL. HENCE THE UNIVERSAL' THAT IS recognised
CANNOT BE ETERNAL.-(2455)
COMMENTARY. The Author next proceeds to show that all that has been said above applies to the case of Letters also
TEXTS (2456-2457). SUCH RECOGNITION IS POSSIBLE IN THE CASE OF LETTERS ALSO, WHICH ARE PERISHABLE,- FOR THOSE WHO HOLD THAT THE UNIVERSAL CAN BE recognised. THAT ELEMENT WHEREIN THERE APPEARS THE NOTION OF DIFFERENCE,-LIKE SLOW, FAST AND SO FORTH,-IN REGARD TO THESE THERE CAN BE NO RECOGNITION ......(?)—(2456-2457)
COMMENTARY. Universal'-in the form of the exclusion of others':-(2456-2457)
It has been argued by the Mimāmsaka, under Text 2121, that-"The notions of the individual Cow-word, though diverse, etc. etc."
The answer to this is as follows:
TEXT (2458). IN THE REASONS THAT HAVE BEEN PUT FORWARD IN PROOF OF THE IDEA OF THE ONE-NESS OF THE WORD, THERE IS NO INVARIABLE CONCOMITANCE POSSIBLE; BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT
INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE CONTRARY.-(2458)
COMMENTARY. For proving the idea of the Word being one only, the Inferential Reasons that have been adduced are such that if a contrary conclusion is established,
26
