1150 Verse 1660

Original

तदत्र नित्यसत्त्वस्य परिणामो निराकृतः ।
तद्विपर्ययसद्भावः कादाचित्को न युज्यते ॥ १६६० ॥

tadatra nityasattvasya pariṇāmo nirākṛtaḥ |
tadviparyayasadbhāvaḥ kādācitko na yujyate || 1660 ||

As regards these arguments—the ‘modification’ of the eternal entity (soul) has been rejected already; the existence of the contrary of such a ‘modification’ cannot be occasional.—(1660)

Kamalaśīla

The above arguments (of Kumārila, in support of ‘Negation’ as a distinct Means of Cognition) are answered in the following—[see verse 1660 above]

This shows the ‘impossibility’ of the first definition of Negation as ‘the non-modification of the Soul’ (see Text 1649). What is meant is as follows:—By the process of Preclusion, ‘non-modification’ is something ‘contrary to modification’; it is this, as appearing at certain times, that is meant to be the characteristic feature of ‘Negation If it were not this occasional ‘non-modification’ that is meant by the process of Preclusion, then the thing defined would be there at all times.—Such ‘non-modification’ is not possible in the case of the Soul; as the possibility of any modification of an eternal entity has been already rejected. Under the circumstances, how could there be any basis for what is only the. contrary of that Modification by the process of Preclusion?

The ‘sattva’, ‘entity’, meant here is the Soul, which is qualified by the adjective ‘nitya’, ‘eternal—Or, the compound ‘nityasattva’ may be expounded as ‘that of which, the sattva, existence, is nitya eternal’; that is, eternal.

‘The existence of the contrary of such modification’;—‘the contrary of modification’ is non-modification;—this cannot be occasional; it must be eternal; as being always of one and the same form, the Soul is one only.—(1660)