Original
अभावोऽभाव इत्येव ज्ञानमत्रावचोदितम् ।
उपाधिस्थं च सामान्यं स्वाश्रयेष्वेव वर्त्तते ॥ ७८७ ॥abhāvo’bhāva ityeva jñānamatrāvacoditam |
upādhisthaṃ ca sāmānyaṃ svāśrayeṣveva varttate || 787 ||The objection urged by us was in regard to such notions as ‘this negation’, ‘that negation as regards the ‘universal’ subsisting in the adjunct, that subsists only in its own substratum.—(787)
Kamalaśīla
What we had urged was as follows:—In the case of the Negation of the Jar, the Negation of the Cloth, the Negation of the Hare’s Horn and so forth,—we find the comprehensive notion of ‘Negation’ appearing, even when there is no such ‘Universal’ as ‘Negation’,—hence in other cases also the assumption of the ‘Universal’ is useless; and we did not raise the objection against the ‘Prior Negation’ and other Negations that are conceived of in connection with a large number of things of the same kind.
“If that is so, what then?”
As regards the ‘Universal’ subsisting in the adjunct, etc., etc.—That is, the Universal ‘Jar’ subsisting in the adjunct, the particular Jar, subsists only in its own substratum,—i.e. only in the Jar, not in the Cloth and other things. How then could there arise, from that, the notion regarding the ‘Prior’ and other Negations of such heterogeneous things as the Cloth and the rest? This is what is meant.—(787)