2038 Verse 3285-3286

Original

उपदेशान्न सर्वज्ञेऽप्ययं किं विद्यते तथा ।
इदं च स्वोक्तमपरं किमत्र न समीक्ष्यते ॥ ३२८५ ॥
सर्वदा चैव पुरूषाः प्रायेणानृतवादिनः ।
यथाऽद्यत्वे न विस्त्रम्भस्तथाऽतीतार्थकीर्त्तने ॥ ३२८६ ॥

upadeśānna sarvajñe’pyayaṃ kiṃ vidyate tathā |
idaṃ ca svoktamaparaṃ kimatra na samīkṣyate || 3285 ||
sarvadā caiva purūṣāḥ prāyeṇānṛtavādinaḥ |
yathā’dyatve na vistrambhastathā’tītārthakīrttane || 3286 ||

“We know it from the assertion (of other persons)”.—Then (the answer is) is there not such assertion in regard to the omniscient person also?—Then again, how is it that you do not recall another assertion of yours to the effect that—“men are always found to be liars”? And just as there can be no confidence in the words of men regarding present things, so also there can be none in the words speaking of past things.—(3285-3286)

Kamalaśīla

The word ‘Upadeśāt’ has to be construed with ‘siddha’ of the preceding text.

By showing the incongruity involved, the author points out the inconclusive character of what has been urged—‘Is there not, etc. etc.’—‘Ayam’—the assertion;—is it not present in regard to the Omniscient Person? It is certainly present. Under the circumstances, if the assertion regarding the marriage of one’s mother is accepted as reliable, then why should you not regard our assertion, that ‘the Omniscient Person does exist’, as reliable? There is no difference between the two cases.

Further, in your words, you have declared that assertions are unreliable; this is pointed out in the words—‘How is it that you do not recall, etc. etc.’.—(3285-3286)