1009 Verse 1430

Original

प्रतिज्ञादिवचोऽप्यन्यैः परार्थमिति वर्ण्यते ।
असाधनाङ्गभूतत्वात्प्रतिज्ञाऽनुपयोगिनी ॥ १४३० ॥

pratijñādivaco’pyanyaiḥ parārthamiti varṇyate |
asādhanāṅgabhūtatvātpratijñā’nupayoginī || 1430 ||

The inference for the sake of others has been described by others as ‘the statement of the proposition and the rest’.—But, not being an integral part of proof (‘proving’), the proposition is of no use.—(1430)

Kamalaśīla

Objection:—“It has been asserted under Text 1363 that—‘Inference for the sake of others consists in the statement of the three-featured Probans’.—Why has this been so asserted, when other people have described the Inference for the sake of others as consisting of the statement of the ‘Proposition’, ‘Final Conclusion’ and ‘Re-affirmation’ also?”

This is what is anticipated and answered in the following—[see verse 1430 above]

The author rejects the said view of other people, in the words—‘But, not, etc. etc.’—‘Sādhana’, ‘Proof’, (here) stands for the proving; i.e. the cognition of the object to be cognised the Proposition is not an ‘integral part’—i.e. the cause—of the proving; this is what is meant by the compound ‘asādhanāṅgabhūtam’.

Not being an integral part of the proving, the Proposition is of no use, and hence need not be stated.

‘Of no use’ may he explained as not a cause; in which case, the phrase would form part of the conclusion set forth here (which would be that the Proposition is not a cause of the proving).—(1430)