0800 Verse 1102-1104

Original

केवलान्नीलशब्दादेर्विशिष्टं प्रतिबिम्बकम् ।
कोकिलोत्पलभृङ्गादौ प्लवमानं प्रवर्त्तते ॥ ११०२ ॥
पिकाञ्जनाद्यपोहेन विशिष्टविषयं पुनः ।
तदिन्दीवरशब्देन स्थाप्यते परिनिश्चितम् ॥ ११०३ ॥
सामानाधिकरण्यादिरेवमस्तिन्न बाधितः ।
परपक्षे तु सर्वेषां तद्व्यवस्थातिदुर्घटा ॥ ११०४ ॥

kevalānnīlaśabdāderviśiṣṭaṃ pratibimbakam |
kokilotpalabhṛṅgādau plavamānaṃ pravarttate || 1102 ||
pikāñjanādyapohena viśiṣṭaviṣayaṃ punaḥ |
tadindīvaraśabdena sthāpyate pariniścitam || 1103 ||
sāmānādhikaraṇyādirevamastinna bādhitaḥ |
parapakṣe tu sarveṣāṃ tadvyavasthātidurghaṭā || 1104 ||

When the word ‘blue’ is uttered alone, the particular ‘reflection’ that appears is one that scintillates through all blue things such as the cuckoo, the lotus, the blue bee and the like.—When the word ‘lotus’ is added to it, then the cuckoo, the collyrium and other blue things become ‘excluded’, and the resultant reflection is one that is further particularised and becomes definitely applied to one blue thing only.—Thus the necessary co-ordination is not rendered impossible. All this explanation is absolutely impossible under the theory of the other party.—(1102-1104)

Kamalaśīla

The following Texts show how co-ordination, etc. is not incompatible:—[see verses 1102-1104 above]

That is to say, when the word ‘blue’ is pronounced, there appears the Conceptual Reflection (the Image) of a doubtful form, inasmuch as it serves to exclude the ‘yellow’ and other colours and things having these colours, and envisages all blue things, such as the Blue Bee, the Cuckoo, the Collyrium and so forth.—When the word ‘lotus’ is added (to the word ‘blue’), the same Reflection becomes apprehended as differentiated from the Cuckoo and the rest, and particularly restricted to the thing excluded from the Non-lotus. Thus in relation to the said Conceptual Reflection, there is a mutual relation of differentiation and differentiated between the two words ‘blue’ and ‘lotus’; and hence there is nothing incongruous in their being related to each other as qualification and qualified.

Or (another explanation possible is that) both the words together express the thing in the form of a single Reflected Image excluded from the ‘non-blue’ and the ‘non-lotus’; so that both pertaining to the same thing, there is co-ordination between them.

Such is the meaning of the Texts as a whole. The meaning of the words is as follows:—‘Scintillating’,—i.e. not restricted to any particular thing, doubtful.—The word ‘pika’ here stands for the Cuckoo.—The rest is easy.

It might be argued (by the Opponent) that—“under our theory also, the co-ordination would be all right”.

The answer to this is—‘All this explanation is, etc. etc.’;—that is, the above described explanation of ‘co-ordination’, etc.—(1102-1104)

Question:—“Why should it be impossible under our theory?”

Answer:—[see verses 1105-1106 next]