स्वयं च नोपलभ्येत चक्षुर्गतरूपवत् ।तस्मात्दाहच्छेदादिसमानाश्रयत्वेन उपलभ्यमानत्वाद्दाहादिवत् कर्मभूतैववेदना ।भावरूपत्वाच्च साश्रया तण्डुलपाकवत् ।वेदनासमानाश्रयएव तत्संस्कारः ।स्मृतिसमानकाल एवोपलभ्यमानत्वात् वेदनाविषयः ।तन्निमित्तविषयश्च द्वेषोऽपि संस्कारसमानाश्रय एव ।तथाचोक्तम्---' रूपसंस्कारतुल्याऽऽधी रागद्वेषौ भयं च यत् ।गृह्यते धीश्रयं तस्माज्ज्ञाता शुद्धोऽभयः सदा ' ॥ ३५ ॥
In plain words
If pain belonged to the perceiver, it could not itself be perceived, just as the eye cannot see a form lodged within itself. Pain is known in the same place as burning or cutting, so pain too is an object of awareness, like the injury itself. Since it is something that arises, it must have a locus, just as the cooking of rice does. Its Saṃskāra—the trace it leaves—rests in that same locus. That Saṃskāra concerns pain and is apprehended at the very moment of memory; aversion toward pain's cause rests where that Saṃskāra rests. As the verse says: 'Distress, like the Saṃskāra of a seen form, and attraction, aversion, and fear—all that is grasped rests in Buddhi. The knower, therefore, is always pure and fearless.'
Close to the Sanskrit
Nor would pain itself be perceived, like a form situated in the eye. Therefore, because pain is perceived as having the same locus as burning, cutting, and the like, it is itself an object, just like burning. And because it is a positive entity, it has a locus, like the cooking of rice. Its Saṃskāra has the very same locus as pain. That Saṃskāra has pain as its object, because it is apprehended at the very same time as memory; and aversion, whose object is the cause of that pain, has the same locus as the Saṃskāra. Thus it is said: 'Distress is like the Saṃskāra of form; attraction, aversion, and fear—whatever is apprehended has Buddhi as its locus. Therefore the knower is ever pure and fearless.'