Now Shantideva refutes the aspect of the general principle that it is permanent. Many of our modern day general principles also include grasping at a belief that this the general principle is permanent.   

The Samkhyas specifically say that the general principle is comprised of indifference, pleasure, and pain. We experience things in these three ways as a result of how the general principle interacts with us. Ultimately, the Samkhyas would say that the indifference, pleasure, and pain that we feel is of one nature with the general principle itself. This is quite similar to Taoist views.

(9.131) In fact, feelings such as pleasure arise from things such as wearing clothing;
And when these causes are lacking, their effects – pleasure and so forth – do not occur.
If the general principle were permanent, its nature of pleasure, for example, would also be permanent;
But this has never been seen by a valid cognizer.

(9.132ab) If pleasure were permanent, it would always be manifest;
So why is it not experienced when pain is manifest?

Permanent in a Buddhist context means not changing. If something changes or is subject to change, then it is impermanent. This is distinct from eternal. Something can be continuously changing yet exist forever, for example the ocean or our mental continuum. Neither are permanent, but both are eternal, or at least last for a long time Despite undergoing continuous change.

The Samkhyas assert that the general principle is permanent, but that its nature is indifference, pleasure, and pain. Obviously, we experience in our daily life different degrees of pleasure and pain and so forth. So how do the Samkhyas simultaneously assert that the general principle is permanent, yet acknowledge that we feel different degrees of intensity of pleasure and pain? The Prasangikas would say if the general principle were permanent, then we would experience unchanging pleasure or unchanging pain. For example, where does the pleasure go when we are experiencing pain?

(Samkhya) “At those times, the gross feeling of pleasure becomes subtle.”

The samk’s answer is that pleasure in pain are always manifest, adjust to different degrees. When we are experiencing pain, our pleasure becomes subtle whereas the pain is more intense. We looked at this when we talked about the example of eating cake at our loved ones funeral.

How can something that is permanent change from gross to subtle?

(9.133) Something that abandons a gross state and becomes subtle
Is at one time gross and at another time subtle, and therefore impermanent.
In the same way, you should assert
That all functioning things are impermanent.

(9.134) If gross pleasure is not different from pleasure itself,
Then clearly pleasure, and therefore the general principle, are impermanent.
You assert that a manifest phenomenon does not exist at the time of its cause
And thus that a product does not exist at the time of its cause.

The Prasangikas agree that the intensity of our experiences of pleasure and pain can change, but if that is the case, then they are impermanent not permanent. Therefore, the example given by the Samkhyas demonstrates exactly why it is impossible for the general principle to be permanent. All functioning things are impermanent.