Original
अथ सा नैव संजाता तथाऽपि प्रतिपद्यते ।
सोऽयं यस्य मया संज्ञा संश्रुतेति कथं तदा ॥ १५६६ ॥atha sā naiva saṃjātā tathā’pi pratipadyate |
so’yaṃ yasya mayā saṃjñā saṃśruteti kathaṃ tadā || 1566 ||If the idea has not been there, then, how is it that the man has the notion that ‘this is the object whose name I had heard before’?—(1566)
Kamalaśīla
The following might be urged—“There has been no previous idea of the relation of the Name at all; hence the Reason ‘because it apprehends what is already apprehended’ is not admissible”.
Answer:—[see verse 1566 above]
If the cognition of the relation of the Name had not been there, then there could have been no such cognition, later on, as that ‘this is the Gavaya whose name I had heard before’.—(1566)
A further argument to the same effect is stated:—[see verse 1567 next]