आगमे विश्वासटिप्पन्यः

Original

चक्षुराद्यतिरिक्तं तु मनोऽस्माभिरपीष्यते ।
षण्णामनन्तरोद्भूतप्रत्ययो यो हि तन्मनः ॥ ६३१ ॥
नित्ये तु मनसि प्राप्ताः प्रत्यया यौगपद्यतः ।
तेन हेतुरिह प्रोक्तो भवतीष्टविघातकृत् ॥ ६३२ ॥

cakṣurādyatiriktaṃ tu mano’smābhirapīṣyate |
ṣaṇṇāmanantarodbhūtapratyayo yo hi tanmanaḥ || 631 ||
nitye tu manasi prāptāḥ pratyayā yaugapadyataḥ |
tena heturiha prokto bhavatīṣṭavighātakṛt || 632 ||

‘Mind’ as distinct from the ‘eye’, etc. is admitted by its also; that idea being regarded as ‘mind’ which appears immediately after the six (cognitions).—If however the mind is regarded as permanent, then there comes the anomaly of cognitions being simultaneous; thus the reason put forward by you becomes destructive of what is desired.—(631-632)

Kamalaśīla

As regards the argument adduced for proving the existence of Mind,—if the mere fact of certain notions having a cause in general is meant to be proved, then it is superfluous.—This is what is shown in the following—[see verses 631-632 above]

If what is meant to be proved is the eternal and one Mind, then the conclusion is one that is annulled by Inference, and the Reason is ‘Contradictory’. This is what is shown by the words ‘If however, etc. etc.’

‘Destructive of what is desired’;—because what it proves is only the dependence (of the notions cited) upon an impermanent (fleeting) cause which is distinct from the Eye and other organs. Otherwise, if they had an eternal Cause, as the Cause would always be present in its perfect form, the successive appearance of Cognitions would be incongruous.—(631-632)