आगमे विश्वासटिप्पन्यः

Original

समयः प्रतिमर्त्यं वा प्रत्युच्चारणमेव वा ।
क्रियते जगदादौ वा सकृदेकेन केनचित् ॥ २२५४ ॥
प्रत्येकं वाऽपि सम्बन्धो भिद्येतैकोऽथवा भवेत् ।
एकत्वे कृतको न स्याद्भिन्नश्चेद्भेदधीर्भवेत् ॥ २२५५ ॥

samayaḥ pratimartyaṃ vā pratyuccāraṇameva vā |
kriyate jagadādau vā sakṛdekena kenacit || 2254 ||
pratyekaṃ vā’pi sambandho bhidyetaiko’thavā bhavet |
ekatve kṛtako na syādbhinnaścedbhedadhīrbhavet || 2255 ||

“Is this convention made for each individual mortal being? Or for each utterance of the word? or only once at the beginning of the world, by some one person?—Does the connection also (of the word with its denotation) differ with each individual? Or is it one only, for all?—If it is one, it cannot be artificial;—if it is different with each, there should be some idea of this difference.”—[Ślokavārtika-sambandhākṣepaparīhāra, 13-14].—(2254-2255)

Kamalaśīla

The ‘Convention’ is in the form ‘this (Word) is the name of this thing (object denoted)’;—for the purpose of comprehension, it could be set up either (a) for each individual person,—or (b) for each utterance and use by each person,—or (c) it would be set up aimlessly once only, at the beginning of the world—at the time of creation—by some one Person—an ordainer, in the shape of God.—These three alternatives are possible.

‘Does the Connection also, etc. etc.’—The connection also between the Word and its Denotation,—when it is set up,—would it sometimes differ with each living being? Or would it be one only?—This is another point for consideration.

If it were one only, it would, like the ‘Universal’, continue to remain through all variations of time and place, and as such it could not be ‘artificial’; that is, it would be eternal.

If, on the other hand, it is different with each living being,—having a different character for each person,—then it would follow that there should be cognition of its difference (and diversity); as diversity in Cognition is always based upon diversity of what is cognised. As a matter of fact, in the case of the words, ‘Cow’ and the rest, even after the word has been used hundreds of times, there is no cognition of any difference; as is clear from the fact that in usage it is always regarded as one and the same.—(2254-2255)

Further, if the Connection is different with each person, then there must be cognition of difference, and this would put an end to all use of the Word. This is what is shown in the following:—[see verse 2256 next]