आगमे विश्वासटिप्पन्यः

Original

सामान्येन गते तस्मिन्नेवं चेत्साध्यधर्मिणि ।
हेतोः सत्त्वं प्रकाश्येत न विवक्षितसिद्धिभाक् ॥ १३८१ ॥

sāmānyena gate tasminnevaṃ cetsādhyadharmiṇi |
hetoḥ sattvaṃ prakāśyeta na vivakṣitasiddhibhāk || 1381 ||

If it were understood to be general, then, what would be indicated would be the existence of the probans in the object where the probandum is present; and it would not accomplish what is sought to be accomplished.—(1381)

Kamalaśīla

The mere fact of its not existing apart from the Probandum,—without the other fact of its existing wherever the Probandum is known to exist,—does not make ‘visibility’—[which does not exist apart from the Probandum, Non-eternality; but is not present in all cases where Non-eternality is present],—does not prove the Non-eternality of Sound,.—Hence the first alternative cannot be right.

‘It would not accomplish, etc. etc.’—that is, it could not establish the desired conclusion regarding the presence of the Probandum in the object.—(1381)

Question:—“Why so?”

Answer;—[see verses 1382-1383 next]