Verse 1717-1719

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

अवधीकृतवस्तुभ्यो वैरुप्यरहितं यदि ।
तद्वस्तु न भवेद्भिन्नं तेभ्योऽभेदस्तदात्मवत् ॥ १७१७ ॥
तेभ्यः स्वरूपं भिन्नं हि वैरूप्यमभिधीयते ।
वैरूप्यं न च भिन्नं चेत्येतदन्योन्यबाधितम् ॥ १७१८ ॥
तस्माद्भिन्नत्वमर्थानां कथंचिदुपगच्छता ।
वैरूप्यमुपगन्तव्यं विशेषात्मकताऽप्यतः ॥ १७१९ ॥

avadhīkṛtavastubhyo vairupyarahitaṃ yadi |
tadvastu na bhavedbhinnaṃ tebhyo'bhedastadātmavat || 1717 ||
tebhyaḥ svarūpaṃ bhinnaṃ hi vairūpyamabhidhīyate |
vairūpyaṃ na ca bhinnaṃ cetyetadanyonyabādhitam || 1718 ||
tasmādbhinnatvamarthānāṃ kathaṃcidupagacchatā |
vairūpyamupagantavyaṃ viśeṣātmakatā'pyataḥ || 1719 ||

“If the said entity were entirely devoid of dissimilarity from the other standard entities,—then that entity would not be different from these; there would be complete non-difference,—as from their own selves. what is called ‘dissimilarity’ is only a form different from those; hence the idea that ‘there is no dissimilarity, and yet the thing is different’ would involve a self-contradiction. Consequently, when one has to accept some sort of difference among things, he has to accept ‘dissimilarity’ also, and thence also the ‘particular’ character of things.”—(1717-1719)

 

Kamalaśīla’s commentary (tattvasaṃgrahapañjikā):

The following Texts provide reasons for accepting the ‘difference’ (particular character) of things from one another:—[see verse 1717-1719 above]

‘Standard, entities’—the Cloth and the rest (to which the Jar is being compared).—If the Jar were entirely devoid of dissimilarity to these other things—Cloth, etc.—then, there being no difference between them, the Jar could not be any thing different from those things; as it would be non-different from it, like the form of its own self. For instance, what is called ‘dissimilarity’ is only that form of the Jar which is different from the Cloth,.—nothing apart from that form; hence to say that ‘there is dissimilarity' in the Cloth, etc., and yet there is no difference from the Jar’, would involve self-contradiction;—as ‘difference’ and ‘dissimilarity’ are synonymous terms.—(1717-1719)