0234 Verse 290

Original

चैतन्यव्यतिरिक्तं हि न दिदृक्षादि विद्यते ।
तस्योदयव्ययावेशे दुर्वारः पुरुषेऽप्यसौ ॥ २९० ॥

caitanyavyatiriktaṃ hi na didṛkṣādi vidyate |
tasyodayavyayāveśe durvāraḥ puruṣe’pyasau || 290 ||

The ‘desire to see’ and the rest are not anything distinct prom ‘sentience’; and if this latter were liable to ‘appearance and disappearance’, then the same could not be denied of the soul.—(290)

Kamalaśīla

‘The same’,—i.e. the attributing of ‘appearance and disappearance’.

This argument may be formulated as follows:—When there is no basis for any restriction regarding the existence of a thing, that thing should not be so restricted by any intelligent person,—e.g. Ākāśa as having a material shape;—in the case of the Spirit there is no basis, in the shape of ‘Desire to see’ and the rest for restricting the character of ‘being the experiencer’ to it; so that no reason is perceived for such restriction.—This Reason cannot be said to be ‘unproven’; as has been explained already.—(290)