0929 Verse 1293-1294

Original

तदयुक्तं यदि ज्ञानं तत्प्रवृत्तं स्वलक्षणे ।
अनाविष्टाभिलापं तज्जात्यादिग्रहणेऽपि हि ॥ १२९३ ॥
तथा(चा)वाच्यमेवेदं साधितं प्राक् स्वलक्षणम् ।
तस्मिन्वृत्तं च विज्ञानं नियतं निर्विकल्पकम् ॥ १२९४ ॥

tadayuktaṃ yadi jñānaṃ tatpravṛttaṃ svalakṣaṇe |
anāviṣṭābhilāpaṃ tajjātyādigrahaṇe’pi hi || 1293 ||
tathā(cā)vācyamevedaṃ sādhitaṃ prāk svalakṣaṇam |
tasminvṛttaṃ ca vijñānaṃ niyataṃ nirvikalpakam || 1294 ||

What has been urged is not right. if the cognition in question appertains to the specific individuality of the thing,—then, even on the apprehension of the universal and other properties, it should remain free from verbal expression. because it has been proved before that the specific individuality of things cannot be denoted by words; hence the cognition that rests upon that must be free from conceptual content (and association with words).—(1293-1294)

Kamalaśīla

‘Even on the apprehension, etc.’—The word ‘even’ means’ even granting that the Universal exists In reality, the Universal, etc. having been already rejected, how could there be any validity in the apprehension thereof? Well, granting that they do exist, even so, on their apprehension, the Cognitions that appear subsequently to the initial Pre-cognition, having only the Specific Individuality of Things as their object, must be free from Conceptual Content; just as the Pre-cognition is. Because the Universal and other properties have been held to be not-difîerent from the Specific Individuality.

The argument “may be formulated as follows:—That Cognition which apprehends the Specific Individuality must be free from Conceptual Content,—like the Pre-cognition;—the Cognition that is held to be the subsequent Perception does apprehend the Specific Individuality;—so this is a natural reason (proving its non-conceptual character).

This argument is only in the nature of a Reductio ad absurdum.—The Reason cannot be said to be Inconclusive. Because, that the Specific Individuality cannot be denoted by words has already been proved in the Chapter dealing with the ‘Exclusion of other Things’ (as forming the denotation of words).

Nor is the Reason Contradictory; as it is present in all cases where the Probandum is known to exist.—(1293-1294)