Verse 404-405

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

सम्बन्धः समवायश्चेत्तत्राप्येवं विचिन्त्यते ।
उपकारीभवंस्तस्य समवायीष्यते स किम् ॥ ४०४ ॥
न वा तथेति प्रथमो विकल्पो यदि गृह्यते ।
सैव प्राप्ता तदुत्पत्तिर्व्यपास्ता साऽप्यनन्तरम् ॥ ४०५ ॥

sambandhaḥ samavāyaścettatrāpyevaṃ vicintyate |
upakārībhavaṃstasya samavāyīṣyate sa kim || 404 ||
na vā tatheti prathamo vikalpo yadi gṛhyate |
saiva prāptā tadutpattirvyapāstā sā'pyanantaram || 405 ||

If the relation between the two (the permanent thing and the conditions) were held to be that of ‘inherence’ (subsistence), then also the following has got to be considered:—Is the ‘inherent’ thing so regarded because it is helpful? Or not so? If the former alternative is accepted, then it comes to be the same as the relation of ‘being produced from it’, and this has just been rejected.—(404-405)

 

Kamalaśīla’s commentary (tattvasaṃgrahapañjikā):

It might be argued that—“the relation between the condition and the Permanent Entity is not that of being produced from it, but that of inhering

in it, the condition being inherent (subsisting) in the Permanent Thing”,—This cannot be right; this is shown in the Text with the words—‘Then also, etc.’—‘Or not so’;—the construction being—‘it is held to be inherent without being helpful’,—Under the first alternative, the help rendered being non-different from the Thing helped, it would come to be the same relation which has been spoken of above as that of being, produced from it; and this has been just rejected.—(404-405)

If the second alternative is accepted, then there being no distinction, everything would be ‘inherent’ in everything. This is what is explained in the following—[see verse 406 next]