नन्वेवं यदि भगवति प्रमाणमनुपयोग्यनुपपत्ति च किमर्थं तद्विषयं शास्त्रम् , तद्धि प्रमाणमेव , परार्थानुमानात्मकं हि शास्त्रम् , तत्र च प्रमाणादिषोडशपदार्थतत्त्वमयत्वमेव परमार्थः । यत्तु सौगतैः पञ्चावयवत्वादि दूष्यते तदाग्रहमात्रं , षोडशसु हि पदार्थेषु निरूप्यमाणेषु सम्यक् प्रतिपाद्यं परः प्रतिपाद्यते , हिताहितप्राप्तिपरिहारयोः इत्यादिना च ग्रन्थेन । परस्य किं प्रयोजनम् , तद्धि परस्य प्रतिपत्त्यै , सा च परार्थानुमानात् , तत्र च प्रतिज्ञादेरुपयोगः इति । तत् परिपूर्णपरप्रतिपत्तिकारि परमार्थतः सकलमेव शास्त्रं परार्थानुमानम् आगमव्यतिरिक्तं न्यायनिर्माणवेधसाक्षपादेन निरूपितम् । इति अत्रापि पूर्वोक्तमेव {किंतु मोहवशात्}(इप्क् १,१।३) इति स्मारयितुमाह ।
अप्रवर्तितपूर्वोऽत्र केवलं मूढतावशात् ।
शक्तिप्रकाशेनेशादिव्यवहारः प्रवर्त्यते ॥ §०§
इह परमेश्वरस्येदमेव परं स्वातन्त्र्यं ---- यत् अस्मादृक्प्राच्यपशुदशाविशेषासंभाव्यमानातिदुष्करवस्तुसंपादनं नाम । इतश्च किम् अतिदुष्करं भविष्यति , ---- यत्प्रकाशात्मनि अखण्डितताद्रूप्ये एव प्रकाशमाने प्रकाशननिषधावभासः प्रकाशमानः । तस्मात् परमेश्वरस्य तत्परं स्वातन्त्र्यं यत् तथानवभासनं पशुरूपतावभासनं नाम ग्राहकांशसमुत्थापनं तद्द्वारेण च ग्राह्योल्लासनमपि । सैषा भगवतो मायाशक्तिरुच्यते । यथोक्तम् ।
{माया विमोहिनी नाम ॥॥॥॥॥॥॥॥॥ । }
In plain words
But surely, if in this way a is of no use for the Blessed One and does not hold, why a about Him? For that is nothing but a , since a is, in its nature, inference for the sake of another; and in it, the truth is just that it is made of the reality of the sixteen categories, and the rest. As for the Buddhists’ finding fault with the five members and the like, that is mere stubbornness. For when the sixteen categories are set out, the other person is rightly taught what is to be taught, and also by the passage that begins “of attaining what is good and avoiding what is harmful”. “What purpose does it serve for the other?” It is for the other’s understanding; that comes from inference for another; and there the statement of the thesis and the rest are of use. So, in truth, every other than scripture that brings about full understanding in another is inference for another, as , the creator who fashioned the , has set it out. To this, to bring back to mind here too what was said before, “but under the sway of delusion”, he says:
Here the dealings of “Lord” and the rest, never set going before because of the sway of delusion, are simply caused to be set going, by bringing the to light.
Here, this alone is the Supreme Lord’s highest : the bringing about of a thing exceedingly hard to do, one that the particular state of that people like us were in before could never think possible. And what will be harder than this: that in what is in nature, while it is shining with its form unbroken, an appearance denying its shining should shine? So the Supreme Lord’s highest is this not shining in that way, that is, making the form of a shine: raising up the grasping side, and through it bringing forth the grasped as well. This is what is called the Blessed One’s of . As has been said:
“, called the bewilderer.”