Sarvadarshanasangraha 12.22

12.22

The prima facie view is that the treatise of inquiry is not to be undertaken because it lacks the status of an injunction; the conclusive view is that it is to be undertaken because it possesses the status of an injunction. In that regard, one who asserts the status of an injunction must state: does the injunction of teaching impel also the student's understanding of meaning, or mere recitation? Not the first, because teaching is accomplished even without understanding of meaning. Nor the second, because in mere recitation the object and purpose of an inquiry are impossible. A doubtful meaning that has appeared prima facie becomes the object of the treatise of inquiry; that being so, where there is no comprehension of meaning at all, what talk of doubt? Any hope for the result of inquiry, namely determination, is far away indeed. And likewise, what is not a doubtful purpose is not within the scope of a sensible person's undertaking. Just as a pot situated in the midst of clear light, in contact with a sense organ accompanied by the mind [is undisputed], by this principle, due to the impossibility of an object and purpose, the treatise of inquiry is not to be undertaken: this is the prima facie view.