Verse 1224

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

यद्वा स्वमतसिद्धैव केवला कल्पनोदिता ।
सर्वत्र नाम्ना युक्तोऽर्थ उच्यत इति योजनात् ॥ १२२४ ॥

yadvā svamatasiddhaiva kevalā kalpanoditā |
sarvatra nāmnā yukto'rtha ucyata iti yojanāt || 1224 ||

Or, what has been spoken of (in the definition in question) is the same conceptual content that we have ourselves asserted;—(this interpretation) being based upon the fact that in all cases things are spoken of by their name (this being the meaning of the compound ‘nāmādiyojanā’).—(1224)

 

Kamalaśīla’s commentary (tattvasaṃgrahapañjikā):

The following Text supplies another answer to the criticism (urged against Diṅnāga’s definition):—[see verse 1224 above]

Question:—“If it be as asserted above, then how do you explain the explanatory words of the Teacher? For instance, he has declared as follows:—In the case of Proper names, like Ḍittha, what is denoted is an object qualified by a Name: in the case of common nouns like ‘Cow’ what is denoted is the object qualified by the Universal ‘Cow’; in the case of adjectives, like ‘white’, what is expressed is the object qualified by the Quality of ‘whiteness’; in the case of verbal nouns what is denoted is the object qualified by the Action; and in the case of words speaking of substances,—like ‘stick-holder’, ‘horned’ and the like—what is denoted is the object qualified by the substance.—By this text the Teacher has made it quite clear that things qualified by the qualifications of the ‘Universal’, etc. are also separately denoted by words.”

The answer to this is that ‘In all cases, etc, etc.’—‘In all cases’—i.e. even in the case of words denoting the Universal, etc.—What is meant is as follows:—Just as when Proper names are pronounced, what is denoted is the object qualified by the Namne,—so also in the case of words expressive of the Universal, etc.,—like ‘Cow’—what is denoted is the object qualified by that Name;—similarly in all cases [what is denoted is an object qualified by, connected with, a name].—(1224)

Question:—“In that case, how are we to construe the Instrumental in the words ‘jātyā’, ‘guṇena’ etc. (by the Universal, by the Quality)?”

Answer:—[see verse 1225 next]