tataś ca phala{lā---}jñāne lakṣaṇānavatārāt, kathaṃ tasyāpi prāmaṇyamavasīyata ityasya codyasyāvakāśaḥ kathaṃ bhavet / tathāhyaṅkurasya hetur bījam iti lakṣaṇe sati aṅkurasyāpi kathaṃ bījatvam iti kiṃ viduṣāṃ praśno jāyate /
And since this definition does not apply to the cognition of the result, how could there be any room for the objection "how is its validity also ascertained?" For instance, when there is the definition "seed is the cause of sprout," do wise people ask the question "how is the sprout also a seed?"