0571 Verse 766

Original

तथा चाभावविज्ञानं नाभावेषु विरुध्यते ।
ध्वनिर्वाऽनुगतोऽनर्थसङ्केतानुगमात्तयोः ॥ ७६६ ॥

tathā cābhāvavijñānaṃ nābhāveṣu virudhyate |
dhvanirvā’nugato’narthasaṅketānugamāttayoḥ || 766 ||

Thus the notion of negation with regard to negation is not incompatible; nor is the comprehensive name (incompatible); because they proceed from convention, which does not involve the assumption of any other entity.—(766)

Kamalaśīla

The following Text further supports the argument (urged under Text 748, above) based upon the notion of ‘Negation’ with regard to Negation—[see verse 766 above]

The only basis for a comprehensive notion, that will apply to all cases, consists in the Body of Convention; otherwise, the incongruity of the comprehensive notion that we have in regard to all Negations,—as also of the very term ‘Negation’—cannot be denied. Because in the case of Negations, there can be no ‘Universal’, which subsists only in entities (not in non-entities).

Why it is not incompatible is shown by the words—‘Because they ‘proceed etc., etc.’; the Convention is called ‘anartha’ in the sense that it does not involve the assumption of any other entity in the shape of the ‘Universal’ and so forth; from such convention, they porceed;—i.e. the Name and the Idea follow the presence or absence of the, said Convention.—(766)