Verse 3444-3446

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

प्रत्यक्षं व्यक्तभासित्वात्प्रमाणं वस्तुसङ्गतेः ।
चक्षुराद्याश्रयोद्भूतनीलादिप्रतिभासवत् ॥ ३४४४ ॥
सम्भवत्येकविज्ञाने सकृत्स्पष्टावभासनम् ।
सर्वेषामपि धर्माणामतश्चैवं प्रतीयताम् ॥ ३४४५ ॥
तथा विभाव्यमानत्वादङ्गनात्मजचोरवत् ।
इच्छामात्रमुखीभावा भावनापि न दुर्लभा ॥ ३४४६ ॥

pratyakṣaṃ vyaktabhāsitvātpramāṇaṃ vastusaṅgateḥ |
cakṣurādyāśrayodbhūtanīlādipratibhāsavat || 3444 ||
sambhavatyekavijñāne sakṛtspaṣṭāvabhāsanam |
sarveṣāmapi dharmāṇāmataścaivaṃ pratīyatām || 3445 ||
tathā vibhāvyamānatvādaṅganātmajacoravat |
icchāmātramukhībhāvā bhāvanāpi na durlabhā || 3446 ||

The cognition in question is vouched foe by ‘perception’, because it is clearly manifest, and is in keeping with the real nature of things; just like the appearance of blue and other things, arising from the contact of the eye and other sense-organs. The single clear appearance of all things in a single cognition is quite possible,—which please understand; also because things are so conceived of, like the woman, the son and the thief; conception too is not difficult to get at, as it can present itself before one by merely wishing for it.—(3444-3446)

 

Kamalaśīla’s commentary (tattvasaṃgrahapañjikā):

The Author now proceeds to show that the cognition of the ‘Void’ and the rest is vouched for by Perception itself:—[see verses 3444-3446 above]

As it is clearly manifested, it cannot be merely fanciful;—as it envisages things vouched for by means of Right Cognition, it cannot be incompatible with the reality; hence it must be regarded as a valid form of Perception, like the Visual and other perceptions.

Thus it having been proved that it arises from mere conception and is clearly manifest, it also becomes proved that all things become clearly manifested simultaneously in a single cognition; and thus the Invariable Concomitance becomes established, and we get the Premiss that‘all things can appear clearly in a single cognition at one and the same time’.—The argument may be formulated as follows:—Things that are conceived of are capable of being clearly manifested in a single cognition;—e.g. the Woman and other things;—all things are conceived of;—hence this is a Reason based upon the nature of things.

The Reason cannot be regarded as ‘Inadmissible’;—this is pointed out by the next sentence—‘Conception too is not, etc. etc.’—That is, the possibility of conception having been proved before, the Reason cannot be regarded as ‘Inadmissible’.—(3444-3446)