आगमे विश्वासटिप्पन्यः

Original

असर्वदर्शिभिर्विप्रैः कुत एतद्विनिश्चितम् ।
चोदनाजनिता बुद्धिः सर्वसंवादिनीति च ॥ ३०९० ॥
निश्चितोक्तानुमानेन प्रत्यक्षस्यापि मानता ।
शुद्धकारणजन्यत्वात्तत्प्रमाणं तदन्यवत् ॥ ३०९१ ॥

asarvadarśibhirvipraiḥ kuta etadviniścitam |
codanājanitā buddhiḥ sarvasaṃvādinīti ca || 3090 ||
niścitoktānumānena pratyakṣasyāpi mānatā |
śuddhakāraṇajanyatvāttatpramāṇaṃ tadanyavat || 3091 ||

How have the Brāhmaṇas, who are certainly not omniscient, been able to ascertain that “the cognition produced by the Vedic injunction is the same at all places and times”?—(3090)

As a matter of fact, it has been already explained that the validity of perception also is ascertained by means of inference. for instance, a certain perception is valid, because it is produced by flawless causes, like other perceptions.—(3091)

Kamalaśīla

[verse 3090]:

Further, it is a mere assertion of yours that—“the Cognition produced by the Vedic Injunction does not vary at different times and places, etc.”. This is what is pointed out in the following:—[see verse 3090 above]

It has been argued under Text 2906, that—“the validity of verbal and other Cognitions is not to be proved by means of Inference, etc. etc.”.

The answer to this is as follows:—[see verse 3091 above]

[verse 3091]:

That argument is called ‘Redtuctio ad Absurdum’ which indicates an undesirable possibility; and it is not undesirable that the validity of Perception should be proved by Inference; hence what has been urged cannot be a Reductio ad Absurdum.—How the validity of Perception can be proved by Inference has been shown before; this is what is recalled in the words—‘For instance, etc. etc.’—‘Like other perceptions’—i.e. like Perceptions bearing upon things before one’s eyes.—(3091)