Original
किञ्च केनाभ्युपायेन विज्ञाता शक्तिरिष्यते ।
अर्थापत्त्येति चेद्यस्मादयं न्याय इह स्थितः ॥ २६४९ ॥
शब्दवृद्धाभिधेयानि प्रत्यक्षेणात्र पश्यति ।
श्रोतुश्च प्रतिपन्नत्वमनुमानेन चेष्टया ॥ २६५० ॥
अन्यथानुपपत्त्या च वेत्ति शक्तिं द्वयाश्रिताम् ।
अर्थापत्त्याऽवबुध्यन्ते सम्बन्धं त्रिप्रमाणकम् ॥ २६५१ ॥kiñca kenābhyupāyena vijñātā śaktiriṣyate |
arthāpattyeti cedyasmādayaṃ nyāya iha sthitaḥ || 2649 ||
śabdavṛddhābhidheyāni pratyakṣeṇātra paśyati |
śrotuśca pratipannatvamanumānena ceṣṭayā || 2650 ||
anyathānupapattyā ca vetti śaktiṃ dvayāśritām |
arthāpattyā’vabudhyante sambandhaṃ tripramāṇakam || 2651 ||Further, by what means does the potency become known?—(2649a)
“It is by means of presumption;—the process being as follows:—The man perceives the word-sound, the experienced man (pronouncing the word) and the thing spoken of—through sense-perception;—the fact of the hearer having comprehended the meaning is cognised through inference from his activity; and the dual potency is cognised through the fact of the phenomenon not being capable of any other explanation;—thus it is by presumption that they recognise the relationship vouched for by the three means of cognition”—[Ślokavārtika-sambandhākṣepaparihāra, 140-141].—(2649-2651)
Kamalaśīla
[verse 2649a]:
Then again, the Potency would be known only when the means of knowing it would be there; as a matter of fact, however, this means is not there.—With this idea, the Author puts the following question:—[see verse 2649a above]:
In the following Texts, the Author sets forth in detail the answer from the view-point of the other party (the Mīmāṃsaka):—[see verses 2649b-2651 above]:
[verses 2649b-2651]:
The process of the comprehension of the Relationship has been thus described by Kumārila:—(1) First of all, through Sense-perception, one cognises the Word (pronounced), the experienced man who pronounces the Word, and the thing spoken of;—after that, through Inference, through the Inferential Indicative in the shape of the activity (of the man), it is known that the Hearer has understood the meaning of the Word—the ‘activity’ is spoken of as ‘Inference’, in the sense of what is instrumental in bringing about the Inferential Cognition;—then, through Presumption, he cognises the Potency as ‘dual’,—i.e. as subsisting in the Word and the meaning.—As the Potency itself is directly cognised through Presumption, it is said that ‘they recognise it through Presumption ‘Vouched for by the three means of Cognition’—i.e. in the Cognition of which, all the three means of Cognition function—in the shape of Perception, Inference and Presumption,—(2649-2651)
The following Text sets forth the objection to the above view:—[see verse 2652 next]