1.2.21
Mīmāṃsā Sūtra / Adhyāya 1 / 1.2.21
न पूर्वत्वात्
na pūrvatvāt
The line
No, because the worldly content is already known.
नेपालीमा
होइन, किनकि लौकिक विषय पहिले नै थाहा छ।
Where it sits
Na answers lokavat iti cet. Pūrva (पूर्व) contrasts with the apūrva (अपूर्व) of 1.2.19. The Vedic sentence about the post remains the thing that cannot borrow the world's excuse.
Split: na (न) + pūrvatvāt (पूर्वत्वात्)
Sanskrit, in depth
The words
| Word | Grammar | Sense |
|---|---|---|
| na (न) | indeclinable | no |
| pūrvatvāt (पूर्वत्वात्) | ablative singular, neuter | because of being prior, because the content is already known |
The phrases
The worldly comparison is refused. In the world the much milk and the female calves are already known. Stating them is not for the sake of the information. From their being known, one understands praise. A hearer would not trust an unknown claim the way he trusts a known one. Praise moves him because he already knows the quality.
In the Veda it is not like that. If the injunctive word does not make the act attractive, the praise sentence will not do it either, for the hearer is then already suspicious of the command. And the Veda's wording is plainly not a known fact. 'For the securing of vigor' is not an established purpose. 'The udumbara is vigor' is not an established reason. One false note would make the hearer suppose another falsehood. So the cow does not save a bare Vedic statement.
Sanskrit in this line
Pūrvatva (पूर्वत्व) is the state of being already established. The ablative gives the reason for na.
Say it back
Say why the cow is a poor model: her milk is already known, and 'the fig is vigor' is not.
Next
1.2.22. The sentence is the remainder of the injunction, and the fruit-words praise.