Verse 3230-3233

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

नरः कोऽप्यस्ति सर्वज्ञस्तत्सर्वज्ञत्वमित्यपि ।
साधनं यत्प्रयुज्येत प्रतिज्ञान्यूनमेव तत् ॥ ३२३० ॥
सिसाधयिषितो योऽर्थः सोऽनया नाभिधीयते ।
यत्तूच्यते न तत्सिद्धौ किञ्चिदस्ति प्रयोजनम् ॥ ३२३१ ॥
यदीयागमसत्यत्वसिद्ध्यै सर्वज्ञतोच्यते ।
न सा सर्वज्ञसामान्यसिद्धिमात्रेण लभ्यते ॥ ३२३२ ॥
यावद्बुद्धो न सर्वज्ञस्तावत्तद्वचनं मृषा ।
यत्र क्वचन सर्वज्ञे सिद्धे तत्सत्यता कुतः ॥ ३२३३ ॥

naraḥ ko'pyasti sarvajñastatsarvajñatvamityapi |
sādhanaṃ yatprayujyeta pratijñānyūnameva tat || 3230 ||
sisādhayiṣito yo'rthaḥ so'nayā nābhidhīyate |
yattūcyate na tatsiddhau kiñcidasti prayojanam || 3231 ||
yadīyāgamasatyatvasiddhyai sarvajñatocyate |
na sā sarvajñasāmānyasiddhimātreṇa labhyate || 3232 ||
yāvadbuddho na sarvajñastāvattadvacanaṃ mṛṣā |
yatra kvacana sarvajñe siddhe tatsatyatā kutaḥ || 3233 ||

“If proofs were adduced to prove that ‘there is some one who is omniscient’, or that ‘there is omniscience in some man’,—then that would fall short of your proposition. In fact these assertions do not represent what is meant to be proved. There is no purpose in proving what is asserted in the above form,”—(3230-3231)

“By proving some omniscient person in general, you cannot get at that particular person whose omniscience you are asserting for the purpose of establishing the truthfulness of his word.”—(3232)

“So long as Buddha is not proved to be omniscient, his words remain false (unreliable). How can the truthfulness of Buddha be established by the proving of some omniscient person in general?”—(3233)

 

Kamalaśīla’s commentary (tattvasaṃgrahapañjikā):

[verses 3230-3231]:

Some people have held the following opinion:—We do not seek to single out any particular person as being omniscient; all that we seek to prove is the possibility of there being such a Person; our idea being that there is some one who is omniscient,—or that omniscience does exist in some person—as can be deduced from the fact that there are ascending grades of wisdom.

The answer to these is as follows:—[see verses 3230-3231 above]

It has been explained before that the Reason adduced by the Buddhist is Inconclusive; the Mīmāṃsaka therefore proceeds to point out the defects in his ‘subject’ (Proposition).

What the Buddhist wishes to prove is the omniscience of his own Teacher,—not merely Omniscience in general. Because, when the Omniscient Person is sought for by the intelligent man,—it cannot be for mere fun. The man seeking for Him does so with the idea that—‘Prom His words I shall find out what Dharma and Adharma are and regulate my activity or inactivity accordingly’. Even if the existence of the Omniscient Person in general were proved, it could have no effect upon the activity of the man; because there can be no conviction regarding the words of such a Person until a particular person had been found to be really such. Hence it is the particular Omniscient Person whose existence should be proved by one who wishes to regulate his activity. Thus therefore the general assertion would be far short of the Proposition.

‘What is meant to he proved’—i.e. the fact that one wishes to establish.

‘Saḥ’—i.e. the particular Omniscient Person, in the person of your own Teacher.

‘Anayā’—the Proposition now put forward.

‘What is asserted,’—i.e. the vague statement that ‘some Omniscient Person exists’ or ‘omniscience belongs to some one’,—without reference to any particular person. By the proving of such a Proposition, no useful purpose would be served.—(3230-3231)

Question:—How so?

Answer:—[see verse 3232 next]

[verse 3232]:

Question:—Why cannot such a Person be got at?

Answer:—[see verse 3233 next]

[verse 3233]:

Because so long as the Omniscience of Buddha himself is not proved, there can be no certainty regarding the truthfulness of His Word.—On the proving of some Omniscient Person in general, the truthfulness of Buddha’s words does not become established. Because the requisite Invariable Concomitance is not there.—(3233)

The same idea is further elucidated:—[see verse 3234 next]