Original
तदत्र वृत्तिर्नास्तीति प्रागभेदेन साधितम् ।
इहेत्यस्ति नच ज्ञानं तद्रूपाप्रतिभासनात् ॥ ६१९ ॥tadatra vṛttirnāstīti prāgabhedena sādhitam |
ihetyasti naca jñānaṃ tadrūpāpratibhāsanāt || 619 ||That ‘the subsistence is not there’ has already been established above, in a general way. As for the notion that ‘it subsists herein’, there is no such cognition at all; as this exact form does not appear in any cognition.—(619)
Kamalaśīla
Under Text 607—the subsistence of one thing in several things has already been rejected above in a general way.
As regards the assertion that “the notion that this subsists herein is vouched for by Perception”,—this also is something out of the common; because, as a matter of fact, among people, no such notion as ‘the Cow subsists in this Horn’, or that ‘the Cloth subsists in the yarns’,—ever appears even in men’s imagination; the notion that appears is that ‘the Horn is in the Cow’, ‘the yarns are in the Cloth’.—Nor in any Perception does the Cloth ever appear as something different from the yarns; and unless the two were distinguished, there could be no such notion as that ‘this subsists in that’, For instance, until discriminating persons have actually perceived the water as something distinct from the Pond, they do not have any such notion as ‘there is Water in the Pond’.—(619)