Verse 910-911

Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation by Ganganath Jha:

नन्वन्यापोहकृच्छब्दो युष्माभिः कथमुच्यते ।
निषेधमात्रं नैवेह प्रतिभासेऽवगम्यते ॥ ९१० ॥
किंतु गौर्गवयो हस्ती वृक्षश्चे(त्या)दिशब्दतः ।
विधिरूपावसायेन मतिः शाब्दी प्रवर्त्तते ॥ ९११ ॥

nanvanyāpohakṛcchabdo yuṣmābhiḥ kathamucyate |
niṣedhamātraṃ naiveha pratibhāse'vagamyate || 910 ||
kiṃtu gaurgavayo hastī vṛkṣaśce(tyā)diśabdataḥ |
vidhirūpāvasāyena matiḥ śābdī pravarttate || 911 ||

“Why do you say that the word brings about the ‘exclusion of others’? as a matter of fact mere negation is not apprehended in the idea brought about by the word; on the contrary, in the case of all such words as ‘cow’, ‘gavaya’, ‘elephant’, ‘tree’ and so forth,—the verbal cognition that results is always in the positive form.”—(910-911)

 

Kamalaśīla’s commentary (tattvasaṃgrahapañjikā):

On hearing the term ‘Apoha’, the other party, having his mind perturbed, and not knowing the exact nature of this Apoha, proceeds to urge against that doctrine the fact of its being contrary to experience:—[see verses 910-911 above]

The particle ‘iti’ is to be taken as understood after ‘anyāpohakṛt’, The meaning is—“Why do you say that what is brought about by the word is the exclusion of others?”

Why should not this be asserted?

“Because, as a matter of fact, mere negation, etc. etc.; that is, ‘the exclusion of others’ is intended to be a mere negation; and mere negation does not figure in Verbal Cognition; on the contrary, Verbal Cognition is always found to apprehend the positive form of things; and what does not figure in Verbal Cognition cannot be rightly regarded as the ‘import of words’; as such an idea would lead to absurdities. Thus the Proposition (of the Apohist) is contrary to experience.”—(910-911)