2012 Verse 3222-3223

Original

अन्यथाऽप्युपपन्नत्वान्नार्थापत्तिरियं क्षमा ।
अतएवानुमाऽप्येषा न साध्वी व्यवतिष्ठते ॥ ३२२२ ॥
उपदेशो हि बुद्धादेरन्यथाऽप्युपपद्यते ।
स्वप्नादिदृष्ट(ष्टं?)व्यामोहा(त्)वेदाद्वादि(च्चावि?)तथ(थं?)श्रुतात् ॥ ३२२३ ॥

anyathā’pyupapannatvānnārthāpattiriyaṃ kṣamā |
ataevānumā’pyeṣā na sādhvī vyavatiṣṭhate || 3222 ||
upadeśo hi buddhāderanyathā’pyupapadyate |
svapnādidṛṣṭa(ṣṭaṃ?)vyāmohā(t)vedādvādi(ccāvi?)tatha(thaṃ?)śrutāt || 3223 ||

“As the fact is capable of another explanation, the presumption (put forward) has no efficacy (in proving the existence of the omniscient person). For the same reason, the inference that has been put forward is not valid. for instance, the fact of Buddha and others having taught dharma, etc. can be explained in another way—For instance, as being due to dreams, or to delusion, or to the Veda itself, or to wrong teaching.”—(3222-3223)

Kamalaśīla

Teaching by people may be due to delusion and other causes also hence both, the Presumption and the Inference cited, are Inconclusive.

Question:—How can it be otherwise explained?

Answer:—‘To dreams, etc. etc.’—as declared in Śabara’s Bhāṣya (I. 1. 2.)—‘Teaching proceeds from delusion also; and when there is no Delusion it proceeds from the Veda also’.—Teaching proceeding from Delusion is found in cases where things dreamt of are taught; and that proceeding from the Veda is found in the case of the teachings of Manu and others.—(3222-3223)