________________
"THE REVEALED WORD.”
1239
The following Text shows that the Reason adduced in the preceding text is not 'inadmissible':
TEXT (2732). As A MATTER OF FACT, THE COGNITION OF THE MEANING IS NOT FOUND TO FOLLOW AFTER A COGNITION ENVISAGING A VERBAL ENTITY APART FROM THE LETTERS; HENCE NO OTHER WORD CAN BE EXPRESSIVE (OF THAT MEANING).
(2732)
COMMENTARY.
That 'cognition of meaning does not exist which appears after a cognition envisaging any verbal entity apart from the Letters: what does exist i that 'cognition of meaning' which appears after the cognition of the Letters. Hence the Reason adduced is not inadmissible'.
This also points out the fact of things being treated as non-existentwhen, being perceptible, they are not perceived.-(2732)
The following Text points out that the said Reason is not Incon. clusive':
TEXT (2733).
IN ALL CASES, POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE CONCOMITANCES ARE DEFINITELY KNOWN TO BE THE GROUND FOR REGARDING ONE THING AS THE effect OF ANOTHER ; AND IT IS THUS THAT THE INVARIABLE CONCOMITANCE IS RECOGNISED IN THE CASE
IN QUESTION.—(2733)
COMMENTARY. * Kāryată, etc. etc. '-Being regarded as the cause, or basis, of being regarded as the effect.
* What is that basis?"
It is positive and negative concomitance. This is co-ordinated with angam':--The only basis for one thing being regarded as the effect of another lies in following the positive and negative concomitance between the two things. Hence the impossibility of there being any other basis for regarding the cognition of the meaning' as the effect of anything else (other than the Cognition of Lotters) provides the proof for the annulment of a contrary conclusion. Hence the necessary Invariable Concomitance between the two becomes established.-(2733)
The following might be urged :-"It may be that the Sphota is not expressive. The Letters themselves, being eternal, would be expressive ; and
