Verse 68

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

धूमात्मा धवलो दृष्टः पावकाव्यभिचारवान् ।
सिताभिधेयतामात्रान्न हिमादपि तद्गतिः ॥ ६८ ॥

dhūmātmā dhavalo dṛṣṭaḥ pāvakāvyabhicāravān |
sitābhidheyatāmātrānna himādapi tadgatiḥ || 68 ||

As a matter of fact, the smoke that has been seen to be invariably concomitant with fire is white; and yet the mention of mere ‘whiteness’ could not prove the existence of fire; if it did, then that existence could be inferred even from the ‘snow’.—(68)

 

Kamalaśīla’s commentary (tattvasaṃgrahapañjikā):

The following text proceeds to show that the Naiyāyika’s reasoning would be open to the fallacy of ‘Indecision’ (Inconclusiveness), even if he gave up the idea of ‘concomitance’ being of a particular kind (i.e, invariable) and. intended it to be in the general form (of mere concomitance in general).—[see verse 68 above]

“How is it then that the Futile Rejoinder is cited?”

The answer is given in the following Text.—[see verse 69 next]