1200 Verse 1753-1754

Original

तदप्यर्थक्रियायोग्यमिति वस्त्विति कल्पने ।
असमर्थपरावृत्तिः सादृश्यं तद्विकल्पितम् ॥ १७५३ ॥
ततश्चात्यन्तभेदेऽपि तुल्यताऽस्ति विकल्पिता ।
भावो भावान्तरैस्तुल्यः खपुष्पात्तद्विशिष्यते ॥ १७५४ ॥

tadapyarthakriyāyogyamiti vastviti kalpane |
asamarthaparāvṛttiḥ sādṛśyaṃ tadvikalpitam || 1753 ||
tataścātyantabhede’pi tulyatā’sti vikalpitā |
bhāvo bhāvāntaraistulyaḥ khapuṣpāttadviśiṣyate || 1754 ||

The conception being there that ‘that also is capable of effective action’,—there would be this idea that ‘it is an entity’ thus there would be subjective similarity consisting in ‘differentiation from what is incapable’. Thus, even though there is absolute difference, there is a subjective similarity; and thus an ‘entity’ being ‘equal’ to other entities, becomes distinguished from the ‘sky-flower’.—(1753-1754)

Kamalaśīla

Objection:—“If there is absolute difference among entities,—how can there be such all-embracing notions as ‘this is entity’, ‘this is entity’ (in regard to all things)?—how too can there be any difference between the Entity and the ‘sky-flower’, etc.—if there were no similarity?”

Answer:—[see verse 1753-1754 above]

‘Differentiation from the Incapable’;—‘the incapables’ meant are such non-entities as ‘the son of the Barren Woman’,—there is ‘differentiation’ from these,—i.e. the entity is not the same as these.

Because the subjective Similarity is there, therefore it cannot be admitted that “If an entity were not equal to other entities, it would not differ from the sky-flower”—(as asserted by the Opponent under Text (1710).