Verse 67

Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation by Ganganath Jha:

अतद्रूपपरावृत्तं वस्तुमात्रमनित्यताम् ।
तादात्म्यत्साधयत्येष न न्यायोऽस्तीह साधने ॥ ६७ ॥

atadrūpaparāvṛttaṃ vastumātramanityatām |
tādātmyatsādhayatyeṣa na nyāyo'stīha sādhane || 67 ||

[In the example of futile rejoinder cited] the mere thing (effect in general), as excluded from all that is not that thing (not-effect), does really prove non-eternality, on account of its being of the same essence as that. but as regards the probans under discussion, there is no reason for it at all.—(67)

Kamalaśīla’s commentary (tattvasaṃgrahapañjikā):

The argument put forward above (against which the example of Futile Rejoinder has been cited) is quite right and proper; because the mere fact of being an effect (Product) in General does prove non-eternality (Evanescence); because between these two there is that invariable concomitance which consists in being of the same essence.—In the case of the reasoning put forward (by the Naiyāyika) however, there is no such reason behind the Probans as put forward by the Naiyāyika—viz. “Because it is characterised by a peculiar arrangement of its component parts”; specially as ‘arrangement of parts’ in general is a factor the contrary of which is not precluded by any incongruity; hence the requisite ‘invariable concomitance’ is not available. In fact any such concomitance in the form of ‘being produced from it’—on the cognition of which the consequent conclusion could become accepted even when one does not actually perceive the actual operation of the Cause,—is absolutely unknown, inadmissible. This is what is meant, by the Text.—(67)