________________
"THE REVEALED WORD."
1209
ALL THE TIME--THE IDEA IS THAT THE ETERNAL POTENOY TS EFFECTIVE ONLY WHEN IT IS ITSELF KNOWN-SO THAT, IF THE known POTENCY BE DIFFERENT FROM THE unknown ONE,—THEN IT LOSES ITS ETERNALITY WHILE IF IT IS THE SAME, WHY IS THIS DISTINCTION SET FORTH ?-(2642-2648)
COMMENTARY. The proper idea would be that some people comprehend the meaning of words through that relationship of cause and effect which might be there ; because the fact always remains that such relationship is the means of such comprehension.
But as regards the Relationship that you posit, everything is wrong. This is what is pointed out by the words—Under your view of the Connection however, etc. etc.' That is in the case of words) tho Connection is held to be a form of Potency-and Potency is described as productive capacity :-and this capacity is held to be eternal and uniform and always restricted to the bringing about of the cognition of the meaning.
Now the question that arises is-Being thus restricted to the bringing about of the Cognition of the meaning-is this Potency held to be without limitations, --not limited to a few persons only-or is it otherwise? These are the only possible alternatives.
Under the first alternative (that it is without limitations), all men would have the Cognition of the meaning at one and the same time.-Under the second alternative also, the cause that serves to restrict the said productiveness of the Potency to certain persons has got to be pointed out; because in the case of all ovanescent effects, there are always certain causal factors that go to regulate and restrict their productivity; not so in the case of eternal things.
The following might be urged—“In the case of eternal things also, their very nature is such that they bring about only certain effects, not all. And certainly no one can object to the nature of things".
In that case, if such is its nature by itself, independently of other things, then, prior to the knowledge of the Convention, or on forgetting the Convention,-under such conditions also, the man who has comprehended that restricted meaning would continue to do so for all time; because the capacity of the Potency to produce that particular cognition would remain there permanently.
The following might be urged :-"As the Potency brings about the Cognition, the Potency in the shape of the Relationship can bring about Cognition only after it has itself been recognised, -not while it itself remains uncognised; hence the incongruity pointed out does not arise".
This is not right. If it is held that the Potency as known differs from the Potency as unknown, then it loses its eternality.-If there is no dif. ference between them, there is no justification for making any such distinction as the Potency known' and 'Potency unknown'. Because for the same person, one and the same thing cannot have the two mutually contradictory characters of being known and unknown.-(2642-2648)