Verse 2760-2761

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

सम्बन्धस्य च नित्यत्वं प्रतिषिद्धं पुरा ततः ।
सम्बन्धाकरणन्यायान्न युक्ता वाक्यनित्यता ॥ २७६० ॥
कतमस्य च वाक्यस्य नित्यत्वमुपगम्यते ।
वर्णमात्रात्मनो वर्णक्रमस्याथ विभेदिनः ॥ २७६१ ॥

sambandhasya ca nityatvaṃ pratiṣiddhaṃ purā tataḥ |
sambandhākaraṇanyāyānna yuktā vākyanityatā || 2760 ||
katamasya ca vākyasya nityatvamupagamyate |
varṇamātrātmano varṇakramasyātha vibhedinaḥ || 2761 ||

The eternality of the relationship has been already rejected hence it is not right that the eternality of the sentence should be regarded as proved in the same manner as that of the relationship.—(2760)

What is the ‘sentence’ of which you are postulating the eternality? Is it what consists only of the letters? Or of the letters as appearing in a certain order of sequence? Or is it something different (from the letters)?—(2761)

 

Kamalaśīla’s commentary (tattvasaṃgrahapañjikā):

[verse 2760]:

It has been argued by the Mīmāṃsaka, under Text 2339 that—“The eternality of the Sentence may be asserted in the same manner as that of the Relationship (between Word and Meaning)”.

The answer to this is as follows:—[see verse 2760 above]

With the idea that under your (Mīmāṃsaka’s) view, the sentence itself is impossible, of which you are seeking to prove the eternality,—the author proceeds to discuss the nature of the Sentence—[see verse 2761 above]

[verse 2761]:

(1) Is the ‘Sentence’ only the Letters pure and simple, without any qualifications?—Or (2) is it the Letters with the qualification of appearing in a certain order of sequence?—Or (3) is it something different from the

Letters,—in the form of Sphoṭa?—There are these three possible views.—(2761)