1406 Verse 2168

Original

प्रत्येकाभिहिता दोषाः स्युर्द्वयोरपि संस्कृतौ ।
अतो न व्यञ्जकः शब्दे कथञ्चिदपि युज्यते ॥ २१६८ ॥

pratyekābhihitā doṣāḥ syurdvayorapi saṃskṛtau |
ato na vyañjakaḥ śabde kathañcidapi yujyate || 2168 ||

The objections that have been urged against each of the other two views are applicable to the view that there is embellishment of both. thus it is not possible in any way that there should be any manifester of the sound.—(2168)

Kamalaśīla

The following Text puts forward the objection against the view that ‘there is embellishment of both, Sound and Sense-organ’ (the third alternative view set forth under Text 2157):—[see verse 2168 above]

‘To each of the two views’—that there is embellishment of the Sound and there is embellishment of the Sense-organ. The objections that have been urged against these are applicable to the view that there is embellishment of both.

‘Thus, etc. etc.’—This sums up the whole criticism (against the Mīmāṃsaka’s view).

The following texts set forth the Mīmāṃsaka’s answer to the above criticism (set forth in Texts 2156 to 2168):—[see verse 2169 next]