因明入正理論疏 3.156

3.156

與頌先後次第不同，如前已辯。問：「若名立具，應名能立，即是悟他，如何說言為自開悟？」答：「此造論者欲顯文約義繁故也。明此二量親能自悟，隱悟他名及能立稱。次彼二立明，顯亦他悟，疎能立，猶二燈、二炬互相影顯。故《理門論》解二量已云：『如是應知悟他比量，亦不離此得成能立。』故知能立必籍於此量，顯即悟他，明此二量親疎合說，通自他悟及以能立。此即兼明立量意訖。當知唯有現、比二量者，明遮執也，唯言是遮，亦決定義，遮立教量及譬喻等，決定有此現、比二量，故言唯有。」

The sequence differs from the verses, as already analyzed before. Question: 'If they are called the instruments of proof (sādhana), they should be called sādhana, which is enlightening others; why does it say "for the purpose of self-enlightenment"?'
Answer: 'The author of this treatise wished to show that while the words are concise, the meaning is extensive. Explaining that these two pramāṇas directly enlighten oneself conceals the name "enlightening others" and the designation "sādhana". Being explained immediately after the two sādhanas shows that they also enlighten others and are indirect sādhana, just as two lamps or two torches mutually illuminate each other. Therefore, after explaining the two pramāṇas, the Nyāyamukha says: "Thus it should be known that the inference that enlightens others also does not depart from this in achieving sādhana." Hence we know that sādhana necessarily relies on these pramāṇas; when made manifest, it enlightens others. Explaining that these two pramāṇas are spoken of jointly in their direct and indirect aspects covers both self-enlightenment and other-enlightenment, as well as sādhana. This concludes the concurrent explanation of the intention of establishing the pramāṇas.
"One should know that there are only two pramāṇas: perception and inference" explains the exclusion of attachment: the word "only" excludes, and also has the sense of determination—excluding the establishment of scriptural authority (āgama), analogy (upamāna), and so forth, and determining that these two pramāṇas, perception and inference, exist; hence it says "only".'