तं प्रति ब्रूयात्---यदवोचो दह्यमाने छिद्यमाने वा देहे प्रत्यक्षावेदनोपलभ्यते ममेति तदसत् ।कस्मात्? दह्यमाने छिद्यमान इववृक्षे उपलब्धुरुपलभ्यमाने कर्मणि शरीरे दाहच्छेदवेदनायाउपलभ्यमानत्वात् दाहादिसमानाश्रयैव वेदना ।यत्र हि दाहः छेदोवा क्रियते तत्रैव व्यपदिशति दाहादिवेदनां लोकः, न वेदनांदाहाद्युपलब्धरीति ।कथं? क्व ते वेदनेति पृष्टः शिरसिमे वेदना उरसि उदरे इति वा यत्र दाहादिस्तत्रैव व्यपदिशति,न तूपलब्धरीति ।यदुपलब्धरि वेदना स्यात्, वेदनानिमित्तं वादाहच्छेदादि, वेदनाश्रयत्वेनोपदिशेद्दाहाद्याश्रयवत् ॥ ३४ ॥
In plain words
Reply to him thus: Your claim that you directly experience pain while your body is being burned or cut is false. Why? Burning and cutting happen to the body, just as they might to a tree, and the pain is perceived in that same bodily place. When asked where they hurt, people name the head, chest, belly, or wherever the burn or cut is; they do not name the perceiver. If pain belonged to the perceiver, or if burning and cutting arose because of pain, they would name the perceiver as pain's locus, just as they name the bodily place as the locus of burning.
Close to the Sanskrit
To him one should say: What you said—'When the body is burned or cut, pain is directly perceived by me'—is false. Why? The body is the object perceived by the perceiver. When it is burned or cut, like a tree, the pain of burning or cutting is perceived in it; pain therefore has the same locus as the burning and the rest. Wherever burning or cutting is done, people locate the pain there, not in the perceiver of the burning. How so? When asked, 'Where is your pain?' one says, 'In my head,' 'in my chest,' or 'in my belly' and thus locates it wherever the burning or cutting is, not in the perceiver. If pain were in the perceiver, or if burning and cutting arose because of pain, one would designate the perceiver as pain's locus, just as one designates the locus of the burning.