आगमे विश्वासटिप्पन्यः

Original

सम्बद्धस्य प्रमाणत्वं स्थितं नो चेन्नृपाज्ञया ।
प्रत्यक्षस्य प्रमाणत्वं कथं वा सङ्गतिं विना ॥ १६२७ ॥

sambaddhasya pramāṇatvaṃ sthitaṃ no cennṛpājñayā |
pratyakṣasya pramāṇatvaṃ kathaṃ vā saṅgatiṃ vinā || 1627 ||

“There is no such royal edict as that ‘that alone is valid which is related’. how does validity attach to perception, in which there is no relationship?”—(1627)

Kamalaśīla

The following Text anticipates an argument from the Opponent’s standpoint:—[see verse 1627 above]

The Opponent says:—“That validity can attach to only what is related can, at best, be only a Royal Edict; there can be no reason for such an idea. For instance, if it were not a Royal Edict that ‘validity can attach to only what is related’,—how could there be any validity in Perception, in which there is no Relationship? This has to be explained”.—(1627)

The answer to the above is provided in the following—[see verses 1628-1629 next]