Verse 1254-1256

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

अलातेऽपि सकृद्भ्रान्तिश्चक्राभासा प्रवर्त्तते ।
न दृशां प्रतिसन्धानाद्विस्पष्टं प्रतिभासनात् ॥ १२५४ ॥
तथाहि प्रतिसन्धानं स्मृत्यैव क्रियते नतु ।
दर्शनेन व्यतीतस्य विषयस्यानवग्रहात् ॥ १२५५ ॥
यश्चास्या विषयो नासौ विनष्टत्वात्परिस्फुटः ।
ततः परिस्फुटो नायं चक्राभासः प्रसज्यते ॥ १२५६ ॥

alāte'pi sakṛdbhrāntiścakrābhāsā pravarttate |
na dṛśāṃ pratisandhānādvispaṣṭaṃ pratibhāsanāt || 1254 ||
tathāhi pratisandhānaṃ smṛtyaiva kriyate natu |
darśanena vyatītasya viṣayasyānavagrahāt || 1255 ||
yaścāsyā viṣayo nāsau vinaṣṭatvātparisphuṭaḥ |
tataḥ parisphuṭo nāyaṃ cakrābhāsaḥ prasajyate || 1256 ||

In the case of the whirling fire-brand, the illusion of simultaneity appears in the form of the circle; this notion of the circle is not due to the connecting of the various perceptions of the fire-brand as it is whirled round; because the (continuous) circular form is clearly perceived. In fact, the said connecting of the various perceptions could be done only by remembrance, not by direct perception; as no perception can apprehend what is past and gone.—The object also of the remembrance could not be very clear, as it has already disappeared; for this same reason, the appearance of the circle also could not be very clear (if it were due to the remembrance of the many cognitions).—(1254-1256)

 

Kamalaśīla’s commentary (tattvasaṃgrahapañjikā):

As regards the instance of the ‘Whirling Fire-brand’, it is devoid of the Probandum’;—this is shown in the following—[see verses 1254-1256 above]

When this mental illusion appears, it does not appear as combining the several visual perceptions (of the Fire-brand); it appears only as the Sense-born single perception of the Circular form, through the force of certain accessory circumstances; that this is so is clear from the fact that the perception is quite clear; and it would not be so clear if it were accompanied by the Conceptual Content. Because such combination of perceptions could be done only by Remembrance, not by Sense-born Perception; as the latter functions only when the object perceived is close by, and hence it could not apprehend what is past and gone. The object too of such a Remembrance could not be clear;—why?—because it will have already disappeared.—Hence, as the perception of the Whirling Fire-brand, if it were an, illusion, would be indistinct,—it cannot be an illusion; in fact, it is a sense-born regular Perception. Thus the Instance cited by the Opponent is devoid of the character sought to be proved.—(1254-1256)