Verse 922

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

वस्तुरूपा च सा बुद्धिः शब्दार्थेषूपजायते ।
तेषु वस्त्वेव ( कल्प्येत वाच्यं ) बुद्ध्यनपोहकम् ॥ ९२२ ॥

vasturūpā ca sā buddhiḥ śabdārtheṣūpajāyate |
teṣu vastveva ( kalpyeta vācyaṃ ) buddhyanapohakam || 922 ||

“As a matter of fact, whenever the said cognition appears in connection with the import of words, it is always in the form of a positive entity; hence in such cases, the import could be assumed to consist of the positive entity only,—a cognition not of the nature of ‘Apoha’.”—[Ślokavārtika-Apoha 39]—(922)

 

Kamalaśīla’s commentary (tattvasaṃgrahapañjikā):

The following might be urged—‘Even without a substratum (in the external world), the cognition in question would appear in the form of the ‘exclusion of the heterogeneous Cow, etc.’; hence the postulation of the ‘Apoha’ is quite right.’

This is answered in the following—[see verse 922 above]

‘Vasturūpā’;—in the form of a positive entity.

The said cognition’,—i.e. the cognition the Horse, without a real substratum in the external world.

‘In connection with the Import of Words’,—as relating to the Horse and other things conceived of.

‘To consist of a positive entity’;—in the shape of the Idea embracing the notion of the Horse and other non-cows.

The effect of the emphasis is explained—a cognition not of the nature of Apoha; i.e. that Import of Words, in the shape of Idea, wherein the Apoha does not enter at all; the compound ‘buddhyanapohakam’ being expounded as ‘the non-exclusion of the Idea’,—i.e. without any exclusion of other Ideas.—Or the compound ‘buddhyanapohakam’ may be explained as follows—‘apohaka’ is that which excludes,—‘anapohaka’ is that winch does not exclude;—the compound thus standing for ‘that which does not exclude the Idea’,—What is meant is as follows;—Though one Cognition is always different from another Cognition, yet when it appears, it does not tend to the exclusion of the other cognition; it always tends to the positive cognition of such entities as the Horse and the like. Consequently the most reasonable thing is to accept the view that what is denoted is a positive entity, not Apoha; because one Cognition cannot exclude (be of the nature of the Apoha, negation, of) another.—(922)