Verse 1748-1749

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

नैवं चित्रत्वमेकत्वं प्रतिषिद्धं ह्यनन्तरम् ।
अनेकरूपं वैचित्र्यमेकत्वेनासहस्थितम् ॥ १७४८ ॥
ते हि यावन्त आकारास्तस्मिन्वस्तुनि भाविकाः ।
तावन्त्येवा(थ) जातानि वस्तुनीत्येकनास्ति (ता स्थि?)ता ॥ १७४९ ॥

naivaṃ citratvamekatvaṃ pratiṣiddhaṃ hyanantaram |
anekarūpaṃ vaicitryamekatvenāsahasthitam || 1748 ||
te hi yāvanta ākārāstasminvastuni bhāvikāḥ |
tāvantyevā(tha) jātāni vastunītyekanāsti (tā sthi?)tā || 1749 | |

It cannot be as explained above. that what is ‘variegated’ cannot be ‘one’ has just been pointed out. ‘variegation’ consists in ‘several forms’, and it can never be concomitant with ‘unity’.—All the real forms that there may be of a certain thing would be so many (different) things; and the thing in question itself remains only one.—(1748-1749)

Kamalaśīla’s commentary (tattvasaṃgrahapañjikā):

The idea that ‘a single entity is variegated’ involves a contradiction in terms, as already explained under Text 1734 above; and the reason for this is that the term ‘variegated’ itself connotes Plurality; and between ‘Unity’ and ‘Plurality’ there is ‘contradiction’ consisting in the fact of the presence of one implying the absence of the other. Consequently one thing cannot have several real forms. Even if it had,—this fact would not prove the plurality of the single thing; as all that it would mean would be that there are so many things come about; but that also only if these forms could be proved to be real. But in no case can Plurality belong to what is one, as the two are mutually contradictory.—(1748-1749)