________________
"THE REVEALED WORD."
1201
TEXT (2621).
IT IS ONLY WHEN THE MAN HAS DEFINITELY RECOGNISED THE SAID CAUSAL RELATIONSHIP THROUGH CONVENTION THAT HE COMPRE. HENDS, FROM WORDS, THE Desire to Speak; AS IN THE CASE
OF THE GESTURES OF THE HAND.-(2621)
COMMENTARY.
The idea is as follows The causal relation that has been recognised is with mere Desire to Speak' in general; as for the said relation with a particular Desire to Spork', as this would naturally be present in the subjective chain of another person (to whom the words are spoken), it could not be known except through Convention; hence it is for the due ascertainment of this that the Convention is made.
Says the Opponent :-"How can this be ascertained through Convention also ? If, at the time of the making of the Convention, the particular desire of the other person to speak were the means of bringing about the Cognition, then it might be that the Convention thereupon would, at the time of usage, serve to bring about the Cognition of the particular desire to speak. As it is, however, the said means is not there yet. Because the Convention cannot be made without pronouncing the Word ; so that if the particular desire to speak' were also comprehended from the same word, then there would te mutual interdependence. Because through Convention, the Word would indicate the particular Desire, and the Convention cannot be made without the Cognition of the particular and general desire to speak; hence there would be clear mutual interdependence".
This does not affect our position. As a matter of fact, the whole verbal usage is admitted only on the basis of one's own impressions ; because it is radically wrong, illusory,-- like the ideas of the man with the blurred vision having the idea of two moons'. Where then does the point of the objection lie ?
Nor indeed is the Word the only means of knowing the particular Desire to Speak', in all cases. Because there are other ways also in which the Convention can be made,-such as actually pointing to the thing, through Context, etc. by positing a special meaning and thereby indicating the particular Desire to Speak'.
Thus there would be no mutual interdependence.
Then again, to you also, who uphold the affirmative view, the objection is equally applicable, that the Cognition of one man not bringing about the Cognition in another man, how can there be any certainty as to the speaker and the hearer having the Cognition of the same thing ?-And without the common Cognition of such a thing; there can be no Convention.
The answer that you would make to this objection would be our answer also to your objection.
The following might be urged—"As the Word does not enter into the Desire to Speak', how can it have any connection with this desire ascertained
