Verse 3080-3082

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

श्रोत्रबुद्धेरपि व्यक्ता नेत्रादिमति(तराभिर?)सङ्गतिः ।
एकसामग्र्यधीनं हि रूपशब्दादि वर्त्तते ॥ ३०८० ॥
परस्पराविनिर्भागात्संतत्याऽन्योन्यकारणम् ।
तेषामस्त्येव सम्बन्धस्तदेवं सुपरिस्फुटम् ॥ ३०८१ ॥
तद्धियामपि तद्द्वारा धूमेन्धनविकारवत् ।
श्रोत्रधीस्तत्प्रमाणं स्यात्तदन्यमतिसङ्गतेः ॥ ३०८२ ॥

śrotrabuddherapi vyaktā netrādimati(tarābhira?)saṅgatiḥ |
ekasāmagryadhīnaṃ hi rūpaśabdādi varttate || 3080 ||
parasparāvinirbhāgātsaṃtatyā'nyonyakāraṇam |
teṣāmastyeva sambandhastadevaṃ suparisphuṭam || 3081 ||
taddhiyāmapi taddvārā dhūmendhanavikāravat |
śrotradhīstatpramāṇaṃ syāttadanyamatisaṅgateḥ || 3082 ||

It is not true that there can be no corroboration of auditory cognition by the eye and other means of cognition. Because colour, sound and the rest are dependent upon the same circumstances. In fact all these are mutually concomitant and, as occurring in the same ‘chain’, they are the cause of each other. Thus it is clear that there is relationship among them. Through these then there is connection among their cognitions also; just as between ‘smoke’ and ‘the effect of wet fuel’. Thus auditory cognition would be quite valid,—on account of being corroborated by other cognitions.—(3080-3082)

 

Kamalaśīla’s commentary (tattvasaṃgrahapañjikā):

It has been argued under Text 2900, that—“no validity could belong to Auditory Cognition because it could not be corroborated by the Eye and other means of Cognition”.

The answer to this is as follows:—[see verses 3080-3082 above]

It cannot be admitted that the Auditory Cognition cannot be corroborated by other Cognitions. Because the sound emanating from the Lute, and the colour of the Lute are both dependent on the same circumstances; and are consequently inseparable and invariably concomitant with one another; so that the two are quite related; just like ‘Smoke’ and the ‘Effect of wet Fuel’, And as both appear in the same ‘chain’ and are mutually dependent, each preceding factor becomes the cause of each succeeding factor; so that there is between them this direct causal relation also.—Thus among the Cognitions also of the said Colour, Touch, etc. there is similar causal relation, based indirectly upon the above-mentioned relation.

In this way, Auditory Cognition can be quite valid, because of its being related to the other Cognitions, through the Eye and other Means of Cognition.—For instance, when one hears from a distance the sound proceeding from the Lute, if he wants to have the Lute, there arises a doubt in his mind as to whether or not it is the sound of the Lute that he has heard,—this doubt being due to the fact of the sound, of the Lute being similar to the sound of the Flute; he then proceeds towards the Lute; and when he actually sees the Lute, the Doubt that had arisen as to the sound being of the Lute or of the Flute or of singing becomes set aside. At a place where the man hears what he thinks to be the reverberations of the sounding of the Drum, and proceeds towards it, if ho does not perceive the drum,—then there being absence of the necessary corroboration, he concludes that the Cognition is invalid.—(3080-3082)