Verse 3030-3031

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

वाक्यं नित्यं पुराऽस्माभिर्विस्तरेण निराकृतम् ।
क्षीणनिःशेषदोषश्च नाप्तोस्ति भवतः स्मृतौ ॥ ३०३० ॥
अक्षीणावृत्तिराशिस्तु कीदृगाप्तो भविष्यति ।
तस्य सम्भाव्यते दोषादन्यथाऽपि वचो यतः ॥ ३०३१ ॥

vākyaṃ nityaṃ purā'smābhirvistareṇa nirākṛtam |
kṣīṇaniḥśeṣadoṣaśca nāptosti bhavataḥ smṛtau || 3030 ||
akṣīṇāvṛttirāśistu kīdṛgāpto bhaviṣyati |
tasya sambhāvyate doṣādanyathā'pi vaco yataḥ || 3031 ||

The eternal word has been discarded by us previously in detail. Under your view, there is no trustworthy person entirely free from all defects; and how can a person be ‘trustworthy’, when the mass of his ignorance has not been dispelled? because on the presence of the defects, it is always open to suspicion that his word may be false.—(3030-3031)

 

Kamalaśīla’s commentary (tattvasaṃgrahapañjikā):

It has been argued under Text 2886 that—“the Word that is eternal or proceeds from a trustworthy person does not become vitiated by the defects of the hearer or the speaker

The answer to this is as follows:—[see verses 3030-3031 above]

‘Previously’—i.e. under the Chapter on ‘The Revealed Word’, the idea of the ‘Eternal Word’ has been refuted in detail; and when its very existence is not admitted, how could there be any investigation regarding its self-sufficient validity?

As regards the ‘trustworthy person’,—no such person is admitted by the Mīmāṃsaka himself; any work written by him also becomes inadmissible. Because, if a man has had all the defects,—Love, Hate, etc.—which are the source of untruth,—completely destroyed, then alone he can be regarded as ‘trustworthy otherwise, how could trustworthiness be accepted in the case of a man whose mind is beset with the sources of untruth, in the shape of Love, Hate and other defects? And you, Mīmāṃsakas, do not admit of any such person as has completely shaken off the entanglements of the ‘Afflictions’ (Defects); hence there can be no ‘word of the trustworthy person’ for you.—(3030-3031)

Then again, granting that there is a ‘trustworthy person’; even so any ‘word’ (assertion) of such a person cannot be said to be known.—This is what is pointed out in the following:—[see verses 3032-3034 next]