________________
"THE REVEALED WORD."
1181
TEXT (2562). THE ASSERTION THAT"IF THE EMBELLISHMENT PERTAINS TO THE OBJECT, IT WOULD AFFECT THAT ONE OBJECT ONLY”—CANNOT BE RIGHT; BECAUSE IT HAS BEEN DISCARDED; ALSO BECAUSE THE CAPACITY OF THINGS IS LIMITED. -HENCE THERE CANNOT BE EMBELLISHMENT OF THE OBJECT.
-(2562)
COMMENTARY.
Na'-That is, it cannot be right to assert that "if the Embellishment portains to the Object it would affect that one object only ".
"Why ?"
Because it has been discarded -i.e. because the Embellishment itself has been rejected. That is, the Embellishment, as different and as not. different, has been already discarded.
For the following reason also there can be no Embellishment of the Object.
“What reason?"
Because of the limitations of the capacity of things.-which are going to bo pointed out.
After .Niyatan' a Cha' is understood; hence the meaning comes to be that also because of the limitations of the capacity of things, there cannot be an Embellishment of the Object.-(2562)
The said
limitation on the capacity of things' is illustrated
TEXTS (2563-2564).
IF THE WORD-SOUND DID NOT POSSESS THE CAPACITY TO PRODUCE COGNITIONS, THEN IT COULD NEVER BE COGNISED BY ANYONE ANYWHERE ; AS IT COULD NOT HAVE ANY BEARING UPON ITS COGNITION.-IF, ON THE OTHER HAND, IT DID POSSESS THE CAPACITY, THEN IT WOULD BE COGNISED BY ALL MEN, AT ALL TIMES AND AT ALL PLACES; AS IT WOULD CONTINUE TO BE THE CAUSE OF THAT COGNITION.
(2563-2564)
COMMENTARY.
By its very nature, the Word-Sound should be either incapable or capable of producing its cognition. These are the only two alternatives possible.In the former case-i.e. if it is incapable the Word-Sound would never be cognised by any one. In the latter caso, it would be cognised by all men at all times; because it would always be of the same form.