Bhashya
यथा स आदेशो भवति तच्छृणु हे सोम्य—यथा लोके एकेन मृत्पिण्डेन रुचककुम्भादिकारणभूतेन विज्ञातेन सर्वमन्यत्तद्विकारजातं मृन्मयं मृद्विकारजातं विज्ञातं स्यात् ।कथं मृत्पिण्डे कारणे विज्ञाते कार्यमन्यद्विज्ञातं स्यात् ? नैष दोषः, कारणेनानन्यत्वात्कार्यस्य ।यन्मन्यसे अन्यस्मिन्विज्ञातेऽन्यन्न ज्ञायत इति—सत्यमेवं स्यात् , यद्यन्यत्कारणात्कार्यं स्यात् , न त्वेवमन्यत्कारणात्कार्यम् ।कथं तर्हीदं लोके—इदं कारणमयमस्य विकार इति ? शृणु ।वाचारम्भणं वागारम्भणं वागालम्बनमित्येतत् ।कोऽसौ ? विकारो नामधेयं नामैव नामधेयम् , स्वार्थे धेयप्रत्ययः, वागालम्बनमात्रं नामैव केवलं न विकारो नाम वस्त्वस्ति ; परमार्थतो मृत्तिकेत्येव मृत्तिकैव तु सत्यं वस्त्वस्ति ॥
In plain words
Listen to how this foundational instruction is given, dear one. Just as knowing a single lump of clay lets you understand all objects made of clay, because they are nothing other than clay. How can knowing the cause make you know the effect? There is no contradiction here, because the effect is not separate from its cause. If you imagine that knowing one thing leaves another unknown, that would only be true if the effect were truly separate from the cause—but it is not. How then do we speak of a cause and its modification in daily life? Listen: the expression 'vācārambhaṇa' means it is merely an initiation by words, a support of speech. What is this modification? It is just a name, a verbal title. There is no independent substance called a 'modification' apart from words; in ultimate reality, only clay is the real substance.
Close to the Sanskrit
How that instruction is, listen to that, dear one—just as in the world by one lump of clay known, all other product-group made of clay, the clay-product group, would be known. How when the cause in the form of a clay lump is known, can another effect be known? This is no fault, because the effect is non-different from the cause. If you think 'when another is known, another is not known'—this would be true if the effect were other than the cause, but the effect is not other than the cause. How then is this in the world—this is the cause, this is its modification? Listen. 'Vācārambhaṇa' is 'vāgārambhaṇa', 'vāgālambana'. What is that? Modification is a name, name alone is the name-bearing, with the suffix 'dheya' in its own sense; the mere support of speech, name alone is purely not a modification as a substance; from the ultimate standpoint, clay alone is the true substance.