आगमे विश्वासटिप्पन्यः

Original

केषाञ्चिदेव चित्तानां विशिष्टा कार्यकार्यिता ।
नियता तेन निर्बाधाः सर्वत्र स्मरणादयः ॥ ५४३ ॥

keṣāñcideva cittānāṃ viśiṣṭā kāryakāryitā |
niyatā tena nirbādhāḥ sarvatra smaraṇādayaḥ || 543 ||

The peculiar character of ‘cause and effect’ is restricted to some minds only; that is how remembrance, etc. come about without obstruction.—(543)

Kamalaśīla

It has been argued above (under Text 493) that “if things are momentary, Recognition cannot be explained”.—The answer to this is provided in the following—[see verse 543 above]

In the term ‘kāryakāryitā’, ‘kāryī’ is that which has an effect, i.e. a Cause; and thus the compound stands for the character of Cause and Effect.—In reality, there is no one who is the Rememberer or the Apprehender of things; for, if there were, then it would mean that the thing is remembered by the same entity that had apprehended it. What happens is that Remembrance and the rest come about only in that ‘Chain’ (or Series) in which their seed has been laid by the successive production of more and more specialised ‘moments’ by a specially vivid apprehension;—and not anywhere else; as the scope of the relation of Cause and Effect is restricted. Such in brief is the sense of the Text.—This has been thus declared:—‘Our theory cannot be vitiated by the possibility of Remembrance and Experience of Results coming to other persons; because there can be no such remembrance at all: Who is the man whose mind has ever remembered what had been apprehended by another?’

As for Recognition and the rest, they are always brought about by previous Remembrance; hence there is no incongruity at all.—Nor has it anywhere been proved that Recognition and the rest are all based upon a single Cogniser, by virtue of which it has been asserted (under Text 494) that “if there were difference between the two, the Recognition would be baseless Because merely on the basis of the relation of Cause and Effect, difference has to be admitted in all cases,—(543)