NEW S E RIE S ,

V O L . XXI V .

VAISES IKA PHI LO S OPHY

ACCO RDING TO T H E

DA SAPADARTHA-SAS TRA

CH INES E TEXT

WITH

I NTRO DUCT I O N ,T RA N S L A T I O N ,

A ND N O T E S

P ROFESSOR I N TH E S OT O S H U COL L EGE , TOK Y O ,

ED ITED BY

F . W . TH O MA S

L O ND O N

RO Y A L A S I A T IC S O CI E TY ,

22 A L BE MA RL E S TRE E T .

191 7

STEP H EN A USTIN AND SON S , L T D .

P R INTER S,

P R EFA CE

T H E V aisesika philosophy has not hitherto been much studied ,

though it seems to deserve a thorough investigat ion . A s regards

its scope , it differs considerably in many respects from the

metaphysical systems of the S amkhya and the V edanta, and

its epistemological basis, natural philosophy , and consequently

its mechan ical View are more consistently elaborated than

might be expected in a school of ancient Ind ian phi losophy .

The present l ittle work does not attempt , as wil l be apparent ,

to give a systemat ic and exhaust ive exposit ion of all the theories

of the school ; but I have tried , in the course of my explana

t ions of the translation , to expound some fundamental and

characterist ic thoughts, where they m ight be helpful in the

understand ing of passages . The work is, however , designed

p rimarily not for scholars , but for beginners , in view O f

whom the bulk of the Introduction and the Notes has been

written .

I am ful ly aware of many imperfect ions . I n parti cular,I ough t to say that the statements concern ing the origin and

development of the Nyaya reason ing (pp . 82—4 , 5 2) are

according to my subsequent invest igations not correct . I t i s

hoped that the reader wi l l not attach importance to the

passage , which fortunately i s not essential 'to the ma in purpose

of the Introduct ion .

Dr. F . W . Thomas has k indly corrected my E ngl i sh , and his

rigorous cri ticism has detected throughout the w ork many of

my oversights. He has also helped me in all matters connected

wi th the reading of the proofs , the subj ect, the arrangemen t ,and the form . But no changes have been made wi thout myassent , and I retain a full responsibi l i ty for all the features of

the work. For a kindness which i s too great to particularize or

P REFA CE

to repay , and wi thout which the work could not have come into

existence , I owe my most sincere thanks .

A special debt of grat itude IS also due to P rofessor Garbe and

P rofessor T akakusu, to whose instruct ion I ow e a part of the

material used in the Introduct ion , and to P rofessor de la V al lée

P ouss in , P rofessor Macdonel l , Miss Hughes , and Mr. J .

Thomas, w ho have been kind to me in many way s.

H AKUJU UI .

CAMBRI DGE .

M ay , 1 9 17.

TA BL E O F CO N TEN TS

INTR ODUCTIONI . T he Treat ise, 1—2 .

II . K w hei-ci, 2-3.

III . T he Founder of the S ystem , 3—7.

I V . P afica-s’ ikh i , 7—9.

V . T he A ut hor, 9-10.

V I . T he Treat ise and it s Commentaries , I O— l l .

V I I . T he S utras of the S ix S ys tems , I l—12 .

V III . The V aiéesik a S fi tra and it s Commentaries , 12—16 .

IX . V aiéesik a and Nyaya , 16-18.

X . V aiéesika Tenet s and the E arly S ect s , 18—33.

XI . D ate of S ystema t izat ion the Ca tegories , 33—8.

XI I . T he S fi t ra : E vidence for D at ing , 38—65 . 1 . T he

V ibhasa, et c . , 38—9 . 2 . A s'va-gbosa , 40—1 . 3 . D ate s

o f Nagarjuna , Deva , et c . , 42—6 . 4 . Nagarjuna ,

46—5 0. 5 . Deva , 5 0—5 . 6 . H ari-varman , 5 5—64 .

7 . Conclus ion , 64—5 .

X III . V aiéesika Doc trines , 66-80. 1 . Genera l , 66 . 2 . T he

Ca tegories , 66—72. 3 . V arious , 72—80. (a ) A sanga ,

72 . (b)‘

V asu-bandhu , 72—4 . (0 ) P aramartha , 74—7.

(d ) Dharma-pala , 77—80.

XI V . Nyaya , 80 1 . Known t o Deva , e tc . , 80—2 .

2 . T he S yllog ism , 82—4 . 3 . Date o f the S utra ,84—6 . 4 . V atsyayana

’

s Bhasya , 86—9. 5 . Fus ion

w it h V ais’ esika , 88—91 .

TEXT DA SA P A DART H I

Chapter I . Individual P ropert iesCategories

S ec t ion 1 . T en Ca tegories , 93.

2 . S ubs tance , 93—4 .

3 A t tribute , 94—8.

4 A c t ion , 98—9.

5 Un iversal i ty , 99—100.

6 . P art iculari t y , 100 .

7. Inherence, 100.

8 P o tent ia l i ty,100 .

9 Non-poten t ial ity , 100.

0 Commonness , 100—101 .

1 . N on-ex is tence , 101 .

93 1 19

93-101

v i i i TA BL E OF CONTENTS

P A G E

TEXT : D A S A P ADART H I (continued) .Chapter I I . Common P ropert ies of the T en

Categories 102—19

S ec t ion 1 . S ubs tance, 102—5 .

1 . S ubs tances A c t ive and Inac t ive, 102. 2 . S ubstancespossess ing A t tribute s, 102 . 3 . S ubs tances possessingTouch , e tc . ,

102. 4 . S ubstances possess ing Co lour,e t c . , 103. 5 . S ubstances E terna l and N on-e terna l ,e t c . , 103. 6 . S ubst ances and S ense-organs , 103.

7 . S ubstances and A t tribute s , 103—105 .

S ec t ion 2. A t tribute , 105 —13.

1 . A t tribu tes P ercept ible and Impercept ible, 105 —106 .

2 . A t tributes as P roduc ts and Non-product s , 106 .

3 . A t tribute s E ternal and Non -eterna l , 106 .

4 . V arying P ercept ib ility o f A t tributes , 107.

5 . Causes of A t tributes , 107—10. 6 . A t tribute sabid ing in one

-

S ubst ance, e tc ., 1 10—1 1 . 7 . A t t ri

butes pervad ing and no t pervad ing t heir S ubstra ta ,1 1 1 . 8 . A t tribu t es destroyed by their E ff ect s , e t c . ,

1 1 1-13. 9 . A t tributes inhering in S ubstances ,e t c . , 1 13.

S ect ion 3. A ct ion,1 13—16 .

1 . A c t ions inhering in S ubs tances , e tc ., 1 13-14 .

2 . A c t ions having S ubstances as their S ubs trat a ,

1 14 . 3 . A c t ions pervad ing t heir S ubstrata , 1 14 .

4 . A c t ions in Body,e tc . ,

S ec t ion 4 . E x is tence,1 16 .

5 . P art ic ulari ty , 1 17.

6 . Inherence, 1 17.

S ec t ions 7—8. P o ten t ia l i ty and Non-pot en tiality , 1 17.

S ec t ion 9. Commonness , 1 18.

10. Non-ex istence, 1 18—19.

l . Non-existe nces E terna l and Non-eterna l , 1 18- 19 .

2 . Non-ex is tences P ercept ible and Impercept ible , 1 19.

S ect ion 1 1 . Conc lusion , 1 19.

NO TES

CH INESE TEXTINDEX

ER RA TA A ND A DDENDA

P age 2 , note 1 , read Bodhicarydm tdra -fikd .

2 , n . 1,read s fiap ti

-md tra ldydm.

4,n . 2 , read celana.

1 1 , l . 2 1 . Insert 1 1 . Kw ando-shé shfij ikkugiron ,1 vol . , by K O -t an

18 , 1. 8 from bo tt om , read is.

p. 36 , 11. 6—8 . Ill ahri-sa tla is found in the Al a hd-vyulpa tti (cc ii i ,

A L IS T O F TE XTS , E D ITIO NS , E TC., COMP E ND IO US L Y

CITE D IN TH IS WO RK

A tomic theory Hast ings’

E ncyclop azdia of R eligion and

E thics , vol . i i (E dinburgh, 1 908Bhdsya O n the N .S . by Vatsyayana . S ee N . S .

O n the V .S . by Candra-kanta (Ca lcutta .

Bibl . Bud . Bibl iotheca Buddhica (S t . P etersburg) .Bibl .

’

I nd . Bibl iotheca Ind ica (Ca lcutta) .B .S . Brahma-S i am .

Can-shw o (or lun tao-li-lun IE ER (or“

54m515: g fifi.

Chit-sait -tsdn-ci-tsi III E . 3251 PB fiD a inihon-zoku-z é hyo

D ina-kart S ee S iddhan ta -muktava li .

D .N D igha N ihaya of the P al i S utta-P itaka .

JA C S . The Journa l of the American O rientalS ociety .

The Journal of the Buddhist Text S ocietyThe Journal of the P al i Text S ociety .

The Journal of the Roya l A siat ic S ocietyof Great Britain and Ireland .

K irand/va li with the L aksandva li,BenaresS .S No . 1 5 (Benares,

L a ksanava li S ee K irandva li .

Maj j hima N ihaya of the P al i S uttaP itaka .

Mimamsa-S atm .

A Ca ta logue of the Chinese Trip itaka , by

B . Nanj io (O xf ord ,Nos. in NanJI O

’

S Ca t .

Nyaya-S utra wi th the Bhasya by V atsyaN .S . yana , Bibl . I nd . (Ca lcutta ,

Nyaya-binclu With the T ika, Bibl . I nd . (Ca lcutta ,

Nyaya-kanda lt S ee P r. E h.

Nyaya-kos’

a Bombay S .S . , No . Xl ix , 2md ed i tion

(Bombay ,

x i i L IST O F TEXTS,ED ITIONS

,ETC .

,C ITED

Nyaya-vdrttika

P rabhd kara S chool

P r. E h .

P rakarana-paneika

S a iny .N

S ap tap .

S a ’rva -dars

'

ana -san'

igraha

S BE .

S han-tsun shi-cu-i-lun

S hi-cil -i-lun

S iddhan ta -muktava li

S i-yii-ci

S loka-vdrttika

S .-t .-kaumud i

Tarka-bhasa

Tarka-dip ikdTarka-kaumud i

T arka-san'

igraha

Vdrttika

ZDMG .

Bibl . I nd . (Ca lcutta ,1 887

The P rabhaka f a S chool of P uri m:M imamsa, by Gangs-math Jha (A llakabad , 1 91 1 )

P ras’

a stapdda-Bhasya with the Nyaya

kanda li, V iz ianagram S .S . , vol . iv

(Bena res ,P andit , old series, vol . i .S amyuttaN ikaya of the Bal i S utta-P itaka .

S ap ta -p adarthi , V izianagram S .S . , vol . vi

(Benares,Bibl . I nd . (Ca lcut ta ,

T ranslated byCowell and Gough , Trubner’

s

O rienta l S eries, 2nd ed . (L ondon ,

The S acred Books of the E ast .

flfi fiz + fil % fih

if] i 33

With the D ina-kart (Benares ,

S amkhya -K arikd .

T ran slated by Ganga-nath Jha, Bibl . I nd .

(Ca lcut ta ,

S amkhya-ta ttva-kaumudi .

P oona , 1 894 .

S ee Tarka-samgraha .

Bombay , 1907 .

With the Tarka-dipika, Bombay S .S . ,

No . lv (Bombay ,

1 Nyaya-varttika .

Va i scsika-S utra with the Upaskara and

the V ivjrti , Bibl . I nd . (Ca lcutta ,

V ienna O rien tal Journal .Wiener Zeitschrift fur die K unde des

Morgenl andes.Zeitschrift derdeutschenmorgenlandischen

Gesel lschaft .

I NTR O D U CT I O N

1 . T H E T R E A T ISE '

AMONG the huge col lection of the Buddh ist tripita/ca in

the Ch inese tra n sla t i on we ha ve only two di st inct works

o f.

other systems than Buddh i sm . The one i s the

S d ihhhya-hariha wi th a commen ta ry ,

and th e other is

a V a iSesik a treati se wi thout a comm en tary . The former

has been tran slated in to French by P rofessor T ak ak usu,and the la tter i s represen ted by the presen t w ork .

The t i tl e of the trea ti se i s in Chinese S ha i'

i-tsa u l -shi

cu-i—lun 2and in S ansk rt V a is

‘

esi/ca -(n ilcaya -)da éapa

( tart/ia -sfc’

i stra ,

3 i.e . a trea ti se on th e t en cat egori es of

the V a iée sik a . It w as composed by a fo l l ower of the

V a iée sik a , and translat ed into Chinese by Yuan Chwang

( H hiien-Cw’

an) in 64 8 A D .

A t radi ti on says tha t K w hei-ci,

4a famous d i sc i p le o f

Yuan Chwang,comm en ted on the trea ti se ; but th i s i s

perhaps a m i stake . Yuan Chwang translated a grea t

m any S ansk rt works in to Ch inese ; but his ma in effort

appears to ha v e been de voted to the transla tion of t he

works o f the S arvast i-vada,espec ia l ly the A bhidharma

and of the V ij nana-vada

,especia l ly the

l T enn or tsung. T he pronunc ia t ions o f the Ch inese charac ters are

t aken princ ipa l ly from Na nj io’

s Ca ta logue a nd G i les ’

D ic t ionary .

I n Ja panese S he-shu-j i-k-kn-gi-rou, some t imes ca l led J ikkugiron .

Copies e xis t in the Bod leian L ibrary (J ap . 65 , Y , 10 , pp . 72b—75 b) and in

t he L ibrary o f the Ind ia O ff ice (ca se pp. l a—l 3b) .3 N an j io , Ca ta logue of the Chinese T rip ita lsa , N o . 1295 . N ihaya is

probably superfl uous .

I n Japanese K i-k i, usua l ly c a l led J i-o u . o r J ion -da ish i -k ik i( 632-82 H e is a grea t commenta t or a nd t he firs t pa triarch o f theFa-h s ia ng-t sung ( the H ossO -shn or a sec t o f the fo llowers of thc

7 0 0 ~

i j na na-vada in Ch ina and Japa n .

5 N o . 1269.

2 V A JS E S IK A PH [L oso rnr

V ij napti mam-a id. s irldhi Sa sha 1 H is d i sci pl es were

d i v id ed principa lly between the two schools .

II . K WH E I-C i

K w hé i-c i is the orthodox propaga tor o f the V ij fianavada and the authori ty on the second work . Th is 18 a

comm enta ry on V asu-bandhu’

s V ij fi ap ti-ond tra to’

c

kart/ca} wh ich is a h ighly auth ori tat i v e exposi t i on o f

the V ijnana-Vada and had t en commen ta ri es by as ma n y

d ifferent Indian authors . Yuan Chwang fi rs t t ran sla ted thet en comm en ta ri es ,

but he a f terw a rd s ama lgama ted them

wi th the comm en ta ry by Dha rma -pala . the t eacher o f

his t eacher , S i la—bhadra . Thi s s econd work,the V ij

’fl ap l l

m atra ta-s iddhi-s‘

astra,i s a scri bed chi efly to Dha rma-pala

,

and is the fundam en ta l w ork of the Fé -hsiang-tsung.

K w hé i-c i comm en ted on the work .

3 Dha rma -pala ’

s work

adopts an id ea l i s t ic standpoin t in epi stemo l ogy and meta

physi cs,and re fu tes the rea l i stic systems

,the S amkhya ,

the V a iSesik a . o ther m inor schoo ls,and the H ina -yana

Buddh i sm . The V a iée sik a in th is work represen ts t he

doctrin es of t he s ix ca t egori es , and seem s to ha v e been

quo t ed by Dha rma-pala h im sel f,because his refuta t ions

agree w i th those in a nother work bv him .

“ K w hé i-c i,

commen t ing on the pa ssage concern ing the V ais’

e sik a ,

quotes a nd paraphrases the t rea t i se,a l though the la t ter

exh ibi ts ten ca t egori es , under the three headings , the

enum era t ion o f the ten ca t ego ri e s and the subd i v is ions,

1 N o . 1 197. A s for the term vij liap t i-md tratd , se e the Bodhica ryava tcira

(P ro fessor d e la V a l lé e P ouss in , Bondclhisme,L ondon , 1898 , p . 27 1 ,

c it tamat re’

pi v ijfiapt i-mat rayam api I ow e t he S a ns k rt

t erm to P ro fe ssor d e la V a l lé e P ouss in . S ec L okat a ttva -n irna ya

(“vij fiapt imatram Suny am cet i sakyasya n is

'

ca vah”

) o f Hari-bhadra(G iorn . d . S oc . A s ia t . ita1. , 1905 , pp . 279 , 283

2 No . 12 15 .

D a inihon-zokn-zoky é , 77 , bk . 1 if . A c opy is k e pt in the Brit ishM u seum . K w hé i-c i

'

s quo t a t io ns a nd paraphras ing are found o n

pp . 29a —40a .

4 Tha t is , N o . 1 198 , a c ommen t ary on Deva '

s Sa ta -éd stra -va ip ulya

(No . S ome passages are tra ns la t ed in this Introduc t ion .

l l . KWH E I -C I 3

the defin it ions of them ,and the rela t ion s among them

,

tha t i s,the first and a po rti on of the second chapter o f

the t reati se . Th is w as,perhaps

,tak en for a commen ta ry

on th e t rea ti s e . K w hei - ci’

s quotati ons are use fu l for

understanding the t rea t i se , so tha t they are freely us ed

in the fol lowing notes,where n ecessa ry .

III . T H E FOUND ER or T H E S YSTEM

K w hé i-c i m ent i on s som e trad i ti ona l a ccoun ts concern ing

the V a iSesik a and i ts founder in th e abo v e comm en ta ry

and in h i s comm en tary on Sankara -svamin ’

s H etu -vidya

nyaya-prcw c§a The trad i ti on s in the two com

men taries are essen tia l ly the sam e,and may be supposed

to ha ve the i r origin in Ind ia,because he has probably pu t

down wha t he had hea rd from Yuan Chwang.

Be fore Yuan Chwang,Kumara—j iva tran slated Deva s

S a ta -éd stra 2 in to Chinese,together wi th th e commen ta ry

by th e Bodh i-sa t tva V a su . The Sa ta -Sastra con ta ins,in

many passages , re futa t i on s of th e S amkhya a nd the

V a iées ik a,e tc . The work w a s a l so comm en ted upon by

a Chinese Buddh i st , Ci-tsan ( 5 4 9— 623 Ci-tsan'

s

commentary rela t es the fol lowing trad i t ions w i th rega rd

to the V aiéesik a and i ts founder

(The founder’

s name) U luk a m ean s an owl ’

The tim e when he l i ved w a s 800 .yea rs before th e Buddha .

By day he composed a work and by n i ght he wandered

about for a lms . The sa tra composed by him i s ca l l ed

the V a iéesilca (-sa tra ) and cons i sts O f Sl ok as .

T he ma in ten e t s are the doctr in es o f the s ix ca tegori es,o f

N o . 12 16 . K w hei-c i’

s commen tary is in the D a inihon-zoku-zolcyo, 86 ,

hk . 4 , pp . 346 it .

N o . 1188 . Kumara-j iva arrived in China (Chan-an ) in 401 A . D . a nd

d ied c . 4 13 , a t the age o f 74 years . H e w as the ch ief trans la tor o f thework s o f the Sunya-vada . S ee N a nj io , Ca t. , A pp . ii, 5 9.

3 I n Japanese R i-chi-zo, or Ka jo-da ish i-k ichizo. H is commen tary isin the D a iuihon-zoku-zokyé , 73 , bk . 5 , and 87, bk . 2 :

4 V A I S E S I Ix'

A P H I L OSO P H Y

the asa t-karya-i

'ada,and that sel f (atma n ) is someth ing

d i fferen t from cogn i t i on

I n another passage he sta tes '

A ccord ing to the L if e of Ha r i-varman ,

‘ there l i v ed

a fol lower of U luka (a t the t ime o f Har i -y arma n,

c . 260 He sa i d tha t th e sut’ra composed’

by our

t eacher, U luka ,

i s named the V a iée.s-iha ( and is

subtl e or schola sti c . I ts gen era l ten et i s the doctrines

o f the s ix ca tegor ies,and the specia l i ty is tha t cogn i tion is

someth ing d i fferen t from se l f . I f anyon e cou l d de fea t m e

in d isputa t ion,I shoul d k i l l mysel f for apology .

’ Th is isa l i tt l e s im i la r to the s ta tem en t o f the presen t t ex t .

U luk a’

s opin ion o f se l f e v i den tly shows tha t he l i ved

when the S amkhya had been systemati zed , and tha t he

founded another sys tem,because h e had di scovered

,a s

i s a ffirmed,the imperfection o f the S fuh k hya f

’

V a iécs i/ca,

the n am e of the sutra,m eans superior

,or excel l en t

,and

dis tingu i shed (or d ifferen t) . The origin of the name is

in the fact that the system i s d i st ingu i shed f roml a nd

superior to,the S amkhya .

” 3

1 Ib id . , bk . 5 , p. 282a . T he source o f his trad it ions is not c lea rlyk nown . Ci-tsafi in his boyhood , when he had no t ye t become a Budd his t ,saw P aramartha accom pan ied by h is fa t her. P aramartha arrived in

China in 5 48 A . D . and d ied in 5 69 A . D . (499 S ee N anj io , Ca t ,

A pp . ii, 104—5 . Ci-ts aii seems not t o have been ins truc ted by P aramart haeven a f terward s . P aramartha w as an em inen t scholar of the V ijfianawid e. and of the A bhidharma -kos

‘

a —s’

astra,w h ile Ci-t sanw a s a d ist ingu ished

propagat or of the Snnya-vada in Ch ina , and res t ored t he S an-lun-t sung( the S an-ron-shu, or

-j iu) .2 Th is mean s the S 'Zimkhya d oc trine Of sel f (purnea ) , tha t is no th ing but

c ogn i t ion (cit , cetana , or j ria ) .3 D a inihon-zoku-zokyo, 87, bk . 2 , p . 103a . T he la t ter part o f h is

accoun t is a lso found in 73 , bk . 5 . p . T he L if e o f Hari-varman

w as composed by Y uan Ch’

a ng (Gen-c lue ) about 4 5 0 A . D . , and is preservedin t he Chu-sdn-tsdn-ci-tsi (N O . v ol . x ii

,pp . 63b— 64a ,

wh ich w as

compi led by S an-y in ( S e-ya ) about 5 20 A . l i .

A ccord ing to the origina l t ex t , Hari-varman l ived in the 900 th yeara fter the Budd ha ’

s N irvana T he fo l lower of U luka surpa ssedo thers in d ispu ta t ion . Having h eard th a t t he k ing o f M agadha

favoured Buddh is ts , he went t o P ata l i-putra a nd asked the k ing t o be

I I I . T H E FOUN DER O F T H E SYSTEM 5

It can hard ly be a scer ta in ed wha t auth ori ty these

tra d i t i on s ha v e,except the ext ract from the L if e of

Ha r i-y arman . N e v erthel ess,the whol e m a t eria l w as not

in vented by the commen tator,becaus e his a ccoun t agrees

in som e respects wi th K w hei-ci . K w hei—c i s ta t es :“ A bout th e end of the tim e of the crea t i on when

the age of creatures w as imm ea surabl e,a t each er ( tirthaka )

cam e to the world . He w as named U luka . U luka m ean s

an ow l’

. I n the daytime he m ed i ta ted in a den se forest,

s ecl uding h imse l f from worl dly a ffa i rs,and a t n i gh t

,when

peop le wen t to rest,h e wandered about for food .

-Th i s

m ode of l i v ing w as very sim i la r to tha t of an o w l,so tha t

he go t the nam e U luk a . H e w as a l so ca l l ed Kana -bhuj

or Kana-bhak sa . K a na m eans ‘

a gra in (or a p i ece ) -o f

( ri ce and bhuj or bhahsa m ean s ‘ to eat’

. The

origin of the nam e was tha t he w a s usua l ly wandering

about a t n igh t,but as young wom en were frightened by

the s igh t of him he afterwa rd s wen t in secret in to m i l l s,

p icked up p i eces of corn from ri ce-bran,and a te them .

He w as, consequen t ly ,

n i cknam ed the ‘ corn-p i ece-eat er ’

.

He w a s further ca l l ed ( th e teacher of) the V a iéesik a .

V a iée sika m ean s ‘ superior ’ or excel l en t ’

( l i tera l l y ,

‘

con

H e composed a work expla in ing the s ix

ca tegori es . The work w a s named the V a iéesihab éd stra ) ,since i t excel l ed other work s in a ll respects

,or becaus e

it w a s composed by a man of super ior intel l igence .

A s he w as th e m a ster and the composer of the

Va iéesiha ( -éct stra ) , he w as ca l l ed the t eacher of the

Vi tiécs iha (1

a l lowed t o en ter in to d ispu ta t ion w i th Buddh is t s . H ari-varman w as

e lec ted t o d ispute wi t h h im , e tc .

A ccord ing t o anot her t rad i t ion , Hari-varman had been a fo l lower o ft he S amkhya before he became a Buddh is t . H e introd uced some d oc trineso f t he samkhya in t o his ow n work

, the S a tya -siddhi-s‘

d stra .

D a inihon-zoku-zolcyr) , 77, bk . 1 , pp . 39a —40a,and 86 , bk . 4 , p .

Cf . N yaya-kos

’

a (Bombay S . S ., N o . t , 2ud p. 743.

6 V A l S E S I K A PH ILOSOPHY

K w hé i-ci a l so ca l ls the founder Kanada ; but to the

Chinese t rad i tions it i s not known tha t Kanada or Kana

bhuj m ean s “a tom-ea t er ’

and the m ean ing o f th e t erm

V ais’

esik a i s super ior or “ excel l en t ”

“ A tom-eater,

”

a s the n i cknam e o f the founder,m igh t

not be probable , because an a tom i c theory i s no t spec ia l

to the system ,a nd th e V aiéesik a i s no t the fi rst pioneer o f

t he theory .

1 “S uperior

” or “ excel l en t ” i s a seconda ry

mean ing of the t erm ,and th e t erm is not used in th is

s ense in V S .

” T he explana ti on o f the name V aiée sik a

tha t it w as deri v ed from the fi fth ca tegory pa rticula ri ty

( vis‘esa ) or the cha racter is ti c of the syst em tha t an obj ect

is precisely ana lysed and class ified,i s more probable .

A nd the above explanation of U lri ka i s d ifferent from

t hat of Ind ian commen ta tors . Raja - sek hara,in his

Nyaya-ka nda li-fl kd ,

expla in s tha t Kanada w as fa voured

by l évara on a ccoun t o f the m er i t of h i s arden t a scet icpract ice . l é vara appea red to him '

a s Uta/camfl pa-dhd ri

( bea ring the form o f an owl ) . O n tha t occas ion he w as

i nst ructed by fsvara in the doct rines of th e s i x categor i es .

3

But lsvara i s no t m en t ioned in V .S .,

a l though la t er

commen ta tors s t ra in the m ean ing of som e passages .

4

Prasas ta-pada a cknowl edged lsvara for the firs t t ime in

the his tory of the V a iéesik a . Cons equen t ly the t rad i t io n

must ha ve been o rigina ted in a t ime la t er than P ra s’

as ta

pada,who lived in the fi fth or s i xth c en tury A .D . The

Ch inese t rad i t iona l explanat i on of U luka seem s to ha v e

been deri ved from an etymo logica l m ean ing o f the t erm,

but it represen ts a n o lder t rad it ion . E ven A sva-ghosa

Bu t in la ter t imes the a tom ic t heory is c o ns idered a s a spec ia ld oc trine o f t he V a ises ik a ( Bra hma -au ra

,ii

,2 1 1 iii ) , a nd t he sys te m

is ca l led t he P a iluk a . S ee Dharmo t t ara , A’

yfiya-bind u-fikd , p . 86

( Bibl .10 ,

‘2 , 7.

Hand t , D ie a tomist ische Grund lage d er Va w es ika -P hilosophie (R os toc k ,

pp. 1—2 ; N ydya-kos

’

a ,pp . 2—3 (d vit iya up odghd ta lc) .

S ee no tes on c h . i, 3 , 22—3 (merit and d emerit ) .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

8 vxxsxsrxA PH IL OS OPHY

exi stent . Kanada l e ft th e explana ti on for a wh i l e and

proceeded to expla in th e ca tegory un i v ersa l i ty-pa rt i culari ty‘

,

1and the ca t egory inherence

,wh ich i s one and

e t erna l . P a fl ca -s’

ikh i accepted these t w o ca t egori es ,

excep t e xi sten ce . Kanada th en fram ed the fo l lowing

syl logist i c proof E xi stence i s n e i ther a substance,nor an

a t tr ibute,nor an act i on Upon “

( hi s proof P anca

sikh i a ccepted the theory o f exi stence . A fter tha t Kanada

d i ed,and the V a ise sik a w as promulga t ed by P a frca-sikh i .” 3

T he t rad i t ion asserts that P afica -si khi w as th e d i scipl e

of Kanada . The first sta temen t of the abo v e two i s v ery

s im i lar to th e trad i t ion o f A sur i , a fol lower o f th e

A ccord ing to the llI ahd -bhara ta and o ther

S amkhya wri t ings A sur i had a d isci pl e nam ed P anca

sikha .

5 There must ha v e been many persons whose nam e

w as P afica-sikh i,or P afica-sikha ,

and P afica—sikh i m igh t be

a d i ff eren t person from P anca-sikha,a fol l ower of the

S amkhya . Con sequen t ly P afica -sik h i, . a fol lower of the

V a iéesik a ,shou ld not be den i ed on th e simpl e ground tha t

the nam e is a lmost the same . But th e trad iti on w as . it i s

obvi ous . con fused w i th tha t o f A suri . Un less w e shoul d

ge t o ther e v id en ce con cern ing P anca -sik h i,we cannot

accept it as it i s . Bes id es,such a syll ogisti c proof w as

not used a t such an early tim e . K w hei-ci further says in

the same comm en ta ry tha t the V a isesik a w as d i vid ed in to

eigh t een schools a fter P afica -éik hi Jus t l ike the e ighteen

schoo l s o f the S amkhya . The reference to the S amkhya,

pro v es tha t th e trad iti on w as con fused wi th,or taken

from,tha t of th e S amkhya . E v en th e e igh teen schoo l s

Ful ly quo ted in no t e s on ch . i, 10.

2Q uo t ed in t he fo l lowing introd uc t ion .

L oo . c it . , p .

S ee t he introduc tory commen t on the S d u'

rkhya Jairilccfi v . 1 . in the

Chinese trans la t ion . P ro fe s sor G arbe , S cin‘

zlchya -P hilosophic, pp . 29—34 .

5 J l a hd -bhara ta , x ii, 2 18 , 14—15 ; S .k .,

V . 70. A c cord ing t o the

c ommen tary on S .k . ,v . 70 in the Ch inese trans la t ion , t he suc c essors o f

Kapila are t hus K apilam A suri— P afica-éikha— ( j argya

— U luk a .

iv . iu NCA 4 nK H r 9

l

o f the S amkhya are no t ascerta ined . I t is,howe v er

,

known tha t there were,in the course o f t ime , many

d iff eren t opin i on s in both system s .

V . T H E A UTHOR

A ccord ing to K w h é i-c i ’s sta temen t,a later fol l ow er o f

the V a iée sik a,or an em in en t teacher among the t ea ch ers

o f the e igh teen school s,w a s Chan -ta-l o . Chan -ta—lo i s

rendered in Ch inese by k i-yu eh , l i t era l ly“ Wisdom

m oon

mam }

He wrot e th e S hi-ciL-i-lun (Da s‘

a -pa dci r lha

Thi s i s the presen t author . Chan—ta-l o i s th e tran s

l i te ra t i on of Can dra in S an sk rt . Cand ra,a s the origina l

o f “ Wisdom -m oon seem s to show an om i ss i on . L a ter

comm en ta tors gi v e the ful l nam e,

“ Chan -ta-( lo-)mo-t i

(Candra but Mati - candra 2 is pre fera bl e t o

Candra-ma t i .

He has an ep i th et . S hari -co ,before h i s nam e . S han-co

l i te ra l ly m ean s an exce l l en t teach er or “a conqueror

and m ay be the t rans la ti on O f V a isesik a in the s en se of

a fo l low er or a teach er o f the V a ise sik a .

“ A n excel l en t

t eacher ”

(or“a conqueror a s an ep ith et can be appl i ed

t o any o ther em in en t teach er , and does no t especia l ly

denot e a fo l lower of a defin i te sy s tem . In th i s ca se th e

t erm excel l en t or superi or as th e translat ion of

V a ise sik a,may a l so n ot be pre ferabl e .

The l i fe o f the author i s not known from K w hei-crs

s ta tem en t,and the t im e w hen he l i v ed i s un certain .

int Dharrna-pala’s re futa t ion O f th e V a is

‘

e sik a i s d i rected

aga inst the doctrines o f the s i x ca tegori es as sta ted

abo v e . I f th i s fact impl i es tha t the auth or i s la ter than

L oc . c it . ,pp . 290,

3 C f . Rajend ra lala M itra , A'

ot ices of J I S S . (Ca lc ut t a ,

vo l . vm ,pp . 80—1 Bha nd a rkar, A Ca ta logue of f/1 6 Caller/ions

(Bombay , p . 0 1 H ara-prasad Sastri , A’

ot ices of M S S . ,vo l .

p . 149 .

10 varss srx a PH ILOSOPHY

D harmapala ,h i s da t e is between Dharma -pala and Yuan

Chwang.

A ccord ing to Yuan Chw ang’

s S i-yu-ci‘ S i la-bhadra

w as,when he w as study ing wi th Dharma -pala

, 30 v ears

o ld,and h e w as 106 yea rs O ld

.

when Yuan Chwang me t

h im ? Yuan Chwang st arted from China in 629

and a rri ved at Raja—grha ,and sa w h im in 633 A .D .

3 S o

Dha rma-pala w as st i l l l i v ing in 5 5 7 A .D .

4 Consequen tly

t he term inu s a qu o of Ma t i-cand ra is 5 5 0 A .D . , and the

terminu s ad qu em is 64 0 A .D . Thi s da te is a l so confirmed

by tha t O f P ra s’

asta-pada . P rasas ta-pada is undoubt edl y

a predecessor 5 O f Mati-candra,and l i v ed in the fi rs t ha l f

o f the s i x th century or the latt er ha l f o f the fifth century ,

a s pro v ed later on . Mat i-candra cannot be earl i e r than

t he first ha l f O f th e s i xth cen tury .

V I . T H E TR EAT I SE A ND I T S COMMENTAR IES

The most Obv ious cha rac terist i c o f the t rea t i se is

t ha t i t a cknowledges t en ca tegori es, adding the fou r

pot en t ia l i ty ( éa k ti) , non -pot en t ia l i ty (a éa lctfi ) , commonn ess

( sdmd n ya -visesa ) , and non-ex i stence (a blad en. o r nea t ) t o

t he s ix in V S . and P o'

. E h . The explana t ions and t ln,

s ource o f the four ca tegor i es wi l l be found in the fo l l ow ing

t rans la t ion and n ot es . A nd the t rea t i s e has no m en t ion o f

isvara,as in th e ca se O f V S . t here is a lso no des c ri pt ion

O f the w a y t o ema ncipa t i on (molcsa ) e ven i f t he s econd

sort of m eri t (dhcm'ma

,one of the twen ty-four a t tr ibutes )

c orresponds t o it it is on lv a defin i t i on O f it . A s a

1 N o . 15 03 vo l . v iii,p . 4001 . N O . 1493 , vo l. iv . p . 105 k.

N O . 1637 , vo l . x ii, p . 84 11 .

4 A c cord ing to K w h é i-e i'

s c omment ary on N O . 1 197 Dharma -pala d iedin t he 32nd year o f his age , t hough t he t rad i t ion is a l i t t le d i fferen tfrom t he T ibet an t rad i t io n men t ioned in Tara -mat ha i

s‘ Geschicht e de g

B udd hismus (pp. 16 1 w hich is la te ra md le ss re l iable. A nd Dharm a

pala is sa id t o have been o ne year younger t han Si la -bhadra hence hel ived in 5 39—70 A . D .

5 This is k nown from t he fa c t tha t t he trea t ise bases it s explana t ionsupon the P raéa sta -p cida -bhd sya (P r . E h . ) in ma ny passages , a s shown int he fo llowing no t es .

V I . T H E TREATISE A ND I T S COMMENTAR I ES

consequence , the author does not a l lude to yoga , yogin ,

o r any th ing supernatura l . The d escr ipti on in gen era l is

throughout con ci se and has no superfiuity or d igres sion .

No comm en tar i es on the trea t i se were composed by

Chinese Buddhis ts ; but la t er Japanese wri t ers composed

the fol lowing

S hoshaj tkkugiron Jet , 2 vol s . , by H e-j in,1 75 8 A .D .

2 . K w a cha -shoshaj fi/ckugiron ,1 v ol . , by K o-ka tsu ,

1 760 .

3. K w a cha-shé shfl j ik/cugiron ,1 vol . , en larged by

S on-k yo.

4 . S hoshdj i/ckugiron -shaku ,2 vol s .

,by K i-ben 1 779.

5 . S hashz‘

tj ik/cugiron -shik’i , 2 v ol s. , by Gon -zo, c . 1 783 .

6 . S hoshz‘

tj ikkugiron Jcecchaku ,5 v ols

,by K ai-do

,1 796 .

7 . S hosh f

r‘

tj ikkug iron -scrim 1 v ol . , by K ai-do,c . 1 796 .

8 . S hoshaj ikkugiron -sha ku-bé icw an froku,1 vol . , by

K O -gon , unda ted ,refut ing N o . 4 .

9. J ikkugiron-monki

,1 vol . , by H O-un ,

1 84 4 , d epending

upon No . 6 .

10 . J tic/cugiron-kogi , 1 vol . , by K e-ho,

1 898,paraphra s ing

No .

V I I . T H E S UT R A S OF THE S IX S Y S T E MS

The da tes o f th e founders and th e sa t’ra s o f t he s ix

systems ha v e been d i scussed by em inen t scholars ; but for

the presen t study the da tes o f the founders and those

o f the sa tra s must be treated a s sepa ra t e probl em s ,because m os t of the founders are mys t i ca l personages

and the i r t rad i tiona l da tes are v ery vague,wh i l e th e

1 These c ommen taries are rare even in Japan , except Nos . 3 , 9 , 10 .

T he present wri ter has been able t o consul t t he las t t w o . N o . 6 is saidt o be t he bes t ; but there a re many c ases o f m isread ing and m isund e rs t and ing . A l l the c ommen taries depend upon K w hei-c i

’

s paraphras inga nd o t her sub-commen t aries O n K w hei-c i

’

s commen t ary , e tc . A fterK w h é i-c i t he Fa-hs iang-t sung w as no t much s t ud ied some tex ts werelo s t and corrup ted . T he th ird pa triarch o f the sec t , C -ceu (Chi-shu, the

sevent h—eigh t h cen t ury ) , m isunders tood some pas sages o f t he trea t iseow ing t o t he corrupt ions o f t he text . These c orrupt ions a nd m isunde r

s t and ing caused the m is take n explana t ions in the above c ommen taries .

1 2 V A I S E S I K A PH ILOS OPHY

da tes o f th e s c‘

clra s canno t poss ibly be so remot e . Jacobi

ma in ta in s tha t th e N yaya -da rsan a and the Brahma

s fztm were composed between 200 and 5 00 A .D . TheV a ises i/ca -da rsa n a and the M imamsa-s z

'

t tm are about aso ld as

,or ra ther somewha t older than

,N .D . and B S .

The Y oga -sain t i s lat er than 4 5 0 A .D . and the S ci on/shyn

sm‘

rct is a modern compos i t i on .

l

A s a ma tter o f fact ; the compi la t i on of the s r‘

ctra s fixes

the doctri n es of the syst em s ; but before the compi la ti on

there must ha v e been,to some exten t , a systema t i za t i on

o f the doct rin es . There fore,e v en i f the abo v e Opin i on

,

w h i ch is adm i rably founded,is qui te acceptabl e

,it

n a tura l ly does no t m ean that there w ere no rudimen tso r no ea rl i er s ta ges of the de v elopmen t o f th e doctrin es .

I n th is sens e the t rad i t iona l founders and the rea l

compi l ers o f the s ft z‘

ras cannot be the sam e person s . For

a h is tori ca l s tudy the ques t i on m av be d i v id ed into t w o

pa rts . The question of the founders reso l v es i tsel f i n to

t he quest ion of t he o rigins of the system s , and the da teso f the sc

‘

ctra s rela t e to the de v el opm en t of the doctrines .

E spec ia l ly i f the s tudy i s o f ano ther w ork than the sa tra

o f a system,resea rches in to the h i s tori ca l de velopm en t

a re n ecessary . I n the course of the fol low ing int roduct ion

the presen t wri t er wi l l t ry to study the origin,the

syst ema ti za ti on ,and som e aspects o f the h is tori ca l

d e v elopm en t o f th e V a ise sik a . Before en tering in to th e

quest i on s som e d igress i on s may be perm i t ted .

V III . T H E V azsn szx a S UT R A A ND rf s COMMENTAR IES

The h i s tori ca l de v elopmen t o f the V a ise sik a and the

Nyay a has been d iscussed by Bodas in his in t roduct ion to

A tha lye’

s ed i tion o f the Torr/ca -samgraha .

2 I t con ta insrel iable in forma t ion ,

and has been quoted by em inent

J A O S . , vo l . x xx i . 19 1 1 , p . 29. D uring t ha t period (200— 5 00 ) l ivedt he o ld commen t a t ors 7at s vavana , Upa

-vars a , the V rt t i-kara (Bod haand probably Sabara -svam in .

Bombay S . S .,N O . lv.

V I I I . T H E V A I S E S I K A S UT R A A ND I TS COMMENTA R I ES 1 3

s cho la rs (Max Mul le r , Jacobi , and S ua l i ) . The V a isesik a

can be t rea ted from the h istori ca l po in t O f v i ew , l ik e othe r

sys tem s ; but th ere is ,as Boda s poin ted out

,a gap in the

h i s tory between the t im e o f P rasasta-pada (or Uddyo ta

ka ra ) and tha t of S ridhara (99 1 A D . ) T he trea t i se w a s

produced during tha t in terva l , and has not yet been

i nfluenced by theori es O f th e Nyaya . But, ha v ing

fo l lowed P r . E h. ,it d i ff ers from V .S . in certa in opin ions

a nd takes the lead o f the modern V a isesik a w orks . The

modern V a isesik a has,to speak rough ly , t w o sources .

The one is P 9“. E h. and the o ther is N .S . and its t’

i sya.

by V atsyayana . T he la tter expla ined som e of the Nyaya

theori es by the V a iée sik a and m i xed them up,whi l e

the form er con tended for the spec ia l theor ies and in som e

mea sure changed the origina l theori es . S om e of th ese

specia l theori es w ere a ccepted not on ly by the treati se,

but a l so by the later con imen ta t-Ors on V .S .

V .S . had and has a t l east the fol low ing commen ta r i es :

l id vana -bhd syn ,

‘ V rttifi Upa skd ra f Bhd rade dj a w rtt i

bhd sya f V ivrt'

zifi and Bhd syafi

S ricarana in h i s P raka fd rz‘ha says tha t som e of th e

V a isesika doc trin es d i scussed by Sank aracarya in h i s

P r. B11 . (V iz ianagram S . S . ,vol . iv ) , In trod . , p . 12 ; K 'ira zuim /Z

(Benares S . S . , N o . Introd . ,p . 12 ; Ca ndra -lgd nIa -blzd sya (Ca lcu t t a ,

Introd . ,p. l [ traw l -p rawn] , by Go vindana nd a , 2 , 2 , 1 1 .

p . 12 ; K in ,p . 12 Aryciya

-lcom ,p . 4 .

By S ankara-m isra and bv Java-naraya im , publ ished in Bibl . I nd . byt he la t ter.

4 By G a i'

igadhara-k a v ira tna -k a viraja (Ca lcut ta ,

5 Hy Candra-kan t a (Calc ut ta ,

T he aut hors Of the las t t hree commen t aries l ived in t he las t cen t ury .

Be s ides these commen taries there are R aghu-deva '

s Cand ra

nand a’

s Bhd sya , Bluis j/a-rama ,

and T llcd (A ufre c h t’

s Ca t . Com,iii

,p . 128 ,

a nd H rsik esa sas t ri’

s Ca t , iii, No . Ca nd rana nda’

s B luisya is sa idby K ielhorn t o be com plete , w h i le the o ther t hree are inc omple te .

l t is no t know n whethe r t hey a re good commen taries or no t . A s t o

the firs t and the second in A ufrech t ’

s Ca t . Ca t ,i , p . 6 15 , it canno t

be a scert a ined whether they are rea l ly commen taries on the sfi l ra .

C f . O ppert’

s L ists , ii, p . 62 , N O . 104 1 . I’r. Biz. is no t a commen t ary

on V . S . , and it is ca l led t he I ’a d cirtha -(Umrma -sa 7iagra ha .

1 4 V A I S E S I K A mu1m sorn Y

Bra hma -s atra -bhd sya represen t an o ld er scho ol and agree

wi th P 'r. E h. ,but they a re no t in harmony wi th t he

Rd va na -bhd sya . Con sequen t ly Ravana is s een to ha v e

been lat er than P rasasta-pé'

tda .

1 N oth ing more can as y e t

be found concern ing Ravana .

The V r tti is quot ed by the Upa s/cd ’ra about e ight t imes .

I t may ,acco rd ing to some wri ters

,be tha t which is som e

t imes ca l l ed the Bhd ra drdj a -vrtt i and ascribed to Uddyo ta

ka ra , s imply because Uddyo ta -kara is Bharad vaj a .

3 A nd

some wri ters ma in ta in tha t the V r tl i o r the Bhd ra dvdj af

v’rtti is the t ex t o f the B/td ra dvdj a «vrtti-bhd sya . But

when the V frtti in the Upa s/cd ra is compa red wi th the la t ter,non e o f the correspond ing pa ssages agree . V S . 6 ,

1,5 4

and 6 ,1

,are no t found in t lie t

’

mu dvdj a -vrtti-bhd syu .

The Upa skd ra’

s referen ce on V S . 7,

3 to the V rtti-kd rw

is ent i rel y at va rian ce wi th the Bhd radvdj a -vr tti-bhd sya .

A ccord ing to the Upa s/cd ra the V r tt i expla ins the

sfi t’r f t 7,l,3

,e ten a n ityesu n itya tvam u kta ’m, thus

n ityesvn u t ty/a triam u lctctm; but the correspond ing satru,

in the Bhd rav j a -vr tt i-bhd sya runs eten a n ityesu n ityd

u ktd h .

5 The con clus ion from these compa rison s i s tha t

n e i ther the Bhd radvdj a -vrtt i-bhd sya nor the Bhdm d t ‘

dj a

vfr tti ,

“ i f the former i s a Bhd syct on the la t ter , nor the

sa tra s in them can be the same as the Wrtti o r the

sa tra s in it . We canno t kno w anyth ing furthe r a s to

the V ’rl‘

f i.

Bod a s’ In trod . . p. 33.

l,2,4 ; 7 :

7 , l , 3 .

3 Afgd yct-kos‘a

,pp. 3— 4 .

4 Ins te ad o f t h is sz‘

t lra , which runs A tman taragunanam atman t are

karana t vat”in t here is inserted Man t re na-adrstakaritarii in

t he Bhd rad w ij a -vytt i-bh0§ ya ,6 , l , 7. S ee the Vivrt i on 6 , l , 5 , wh ich

says t ha t t his la t ter aura is in and should be supplied to t he

former sum .

5 S ee no tes on cha p. ii, 2 ,

P r. E h . , In trod ., p. 12 ,

V arana syam e k asya samnyas ino mik utetalapa t tresu ma ithilak sarair l ikhitarii j irna tvat sama n tac chinnan

'

i bharad vajavrt t ipus t akam vart ate .

‘

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 6 V A I S E S IK A PH ILOSOPH Y

by comm en tators wi th d ifferen t opin ion s . O n the other

hand ,such d i ff eren t explana tion s show tha t the V aisesik a

doctrines de v eloped a fter th e s at/rat had been compi l ed .

’

I X. V A I S E S I K A A ND N YAYA

A fter the compi la t ion o f V S . th e author of N S .

introduced its doc trines into h i s ow n m etaphysics . The

no t doubt ful examples are N S . 3,1,36 1 V S . 4

,l,8 )

a nd 2,1

,5 4 ( essen t ia l ly the sam e as V S . 7 ,

2,

The

t‘

t syct o f V atsyaya na used many pa ssages from V S . e v en

a s exampl es of rea son ing ?

The da t e of N S . seems to be between Nagarj una ( the

second- th i rd cen tury ) and V asu-bandhu ( the fourth

cen tury ) .

V atsyayana had a predecessor in comm en ting on N S .

“

a nd ca l ls the author a yusif whi ch proves that som e t im e

e lapsed between the author and V at syayana .

'

V atsyayana

was a t tacked by Dig—naga . Dig-naga ’

s work s were,f or

t he fi rst t im e,tran sla ted in to Ch inese in 5 5 7— 69 by

1’aramartha .

6 D ig-naga must hav e l i v ed a t th e la test in

t he fifth o r s i xth cen tury,probably in the m idd l e ( or th e

1 Th is sfitra has a lread y been po in ted out by Wind isch in his Uber da s1

ryagu

-bhd sya (L eipzig , T he s fnfira is no t found in V isva-natha '

s

l’

fm'

bu t Uddyo t a-k ara '

s A'

yd g/a-t-(ir/t ilca a nd V aca S pa t i

-m isra ’

s N yciyu

ancz-nibandhu,upon t he la t t er o f wh ich the Vrl l i depe nd s , rec k on it a s

t s ew -a o f 1V S . Bes id e s , c ompare 1V S . 3 , 1 , 28 w i th V S . 4 ,2 , 3 ;

AT S . 3 , l , 35 w i t h V S . 4 , 1 , 6—13 ; N S . 3 , 1 , 63 w it h V S . 8 , 2 , 4

— 5 ;

ATS . 3 , 1 , 71 w i th V S . 8 , 2 , 5 ; Af'

S . 3 , 2 , 63 wit h V S . 7 , 1 , 23 ; a nd

V S . 1 , 1 , 10 w i th V S . 3 , 2 , 4 .

9 A c c ord ing t o°

J acobi V S . 4 , l , 6 is quo ted by t he Bird sya on N'

S .

1 . 33 and 3 , 1 , 69 , and V S . 3 ,l,16 by the B lid sya. on 2 ,

2,36 . Be side s .

a s t he exam ple o f t he second explana t ion o f sesa va t o f 1\T. S . 1 , l , 5 , V S .

1 , 1 , 8 (or 2 2,

2,2 , 23 ; 2 ,

2 , 3 1 ; 27 a re free ly used,a nd eve n

in o t her passages o f the Bhd syct t he re are con ta ined V a ise s ik a theories .

T he Bhd sya on 1, l , 9 asserts t ha t t he s ix ca tegories o f the V a ises ik a a re

p rameya . Th is a ssert ion is fo l low ed by la ter wri ters .

V . S m i th , E a r/y H istory of'

l nrl iu , 3rd cd . ,pp . 328—44 .

4 O n 1, 2 , 9 . E ke na iyay ikah in t he Bluisya on 1 , 1 , 32 probably

i l lude s t o someone o f a t ime earl ier than t hat of the author o f the sz’

dm .

5 O n 2,l 1 5 .

N os . 1 1 12 , 125 5 .

ix . V A I S E S I K A A ND N Y AY A 1 7

latter ha l f) of the fi fth cen tury .

1 Hence V atsyayana i s

in ferred to ha ve l i v ed in the latter ha l f of the fourth

cen tury,or in the first ha l f o f th e fi fth c en tury .

Dig-naga w as a ttacked by Uddyota-ka ra ,

2and h i s logi c

w as fol l owed by P rasasta-pada .

3 P rasasta-pada i s earl i e r

than , or a con tempora ry of,Uddyota

-kara,because

Uddyota-ka ra a l ludes to P r . E h.

4 Uddyota-kara i s sa id

t o hav e been an swered by Dharma-kirti,who w as referred

to by K umarila-bha t ta and Sal ik a-natha,

5a d isc ipl e

o f P rabha-ka ra . These tea che rs were an swered by

Dharmot tara ; Dharm ot tara w as cri tic ized by S ridhara “

( 991 A D .)Dharma-k irti i s not m ent i on ed by Yuan Chwang

( tra ve l l ed through Ind ia 629 but he i s spoken of

by I -ts ing ( 671 Con sequen tly Dharma-k irt i’

s pa lmy

days were in 64 5 — 71,and he w as

,a ccord ing to the

Ti betan trad i tion,a con tempora ry of K umarila-bha t t a

,who

w as earl i er than Sank aracarya (c. the e ighth cen tury ) .8

V . S m ith , loc . c it . , p. 324 ( the fi ft h century ) . T he T ibeta n trad i t iona ssert s t ha t D ig-naga w as a d isc iple of V as u-bandhu (T aranatha

’

s

Geschichle, p .

2 E spec ia l ly Nutiya -vd rl tika , pp . 14 f . , 17 f . , 4 1 , 43 f . , 5 2 f . , 36 f . , 184 f . ,

1 1 1 f . , 1 16 f . , 122 f 127 f . , 347 f . , 389 f . , 435 , e t c .

3 Cf . P r. E h. , pp . 233—5 2 , w i t h I I el u -ridyd -nydg/a -d rd ra -sd slra(No . 1223 N o . pp. l a—3a , 5 a

—7b.

4 E spec ia l ly Vd rl l iloa , p . 288— P r. Bh. p . 288 ; V . pp. 3 19—20— P r .

Bh . pp. 1 1 , 3 1 1 V . p . 320— P r. E h . pp. 14 , 324 ; V . p . 468— P r. E h .

p . 48 ; V . p . 4 17— P 7'

. E h . pp . 106—7.

5 P ra lcam zia -pa ficikd (P and i t , o ld series , vo l . i) , p . 44,quotes Dharma

k irt i'

s t heory o f P ra lya lcsa (c f . N'

yriya-bind u

,p .

‘31V ydya

-ka nda l l (V izianagram S . S . , vol . v i) , p. 76 . T he above s ta tement depend s upon M ax Mul ler’s S ix S ystems , p . 477 ; V idyabhnsana

’

s

H istory of the il l erl iera l S chool of I nd ian L ogic (Ca lcut t a , The

I nfl uence of Buddhism on the D evelopment of 1V yciya P hilosophy

(JE TS ,Bodas

’ Introd . t o t he T arka-samgraha ; Jacobi ’s A tomic

Theory , I nd ische L ogik (Get t inger N achrich ten , ph i1.-h is t . K L , 1901 ,

pp . 460 and The D a l es of ( he P hilosophica l S l7l 7’

a 8 (J A O S . , vol . xxx i ,pp . 1

7 N o . 1492 , vo l . iv , p. 88a . P ro fessor T ak ak usu , I -lsz’

ng , p . lv ii i .3 D eussen , The S ystem of the V edanta

,pp. 35 —6 ; P rofessor Garbe ,

S dmkhya rP hilosophie , p . 42

1 8 V A I S E S I K A PHI LOSOPHY

Uddyota-kara l i v ed earl i e r than Dharma-k irti

,perhaps in

the s i xth—seven th century .

1

P rasasta -pada , be ing earl i er than Uddyota-k ara and

later than Dig-naga , l i ved in th e firs t ha l f o f the s i xth

cen tury,or rather in th e la tter ha l f of th e fifth c en tury .

H i s date i s a l so pro ved by the da tes of Dharfna-pala

( 5 39 and of P aramartha ( 4 99 because the two

Buddh ists cannot be ea rl i e r than P rasasta-pada . The

V aise sik a doctrines quoted and re futed by both Buddh ists

cam e from P r. E h.,a s proved later on .

A fter NS . and i ts Bhd syd P ra s’

asta-pada preci sely

systemati zed th e V aisesik a doctrin es ; hi s Bhd sya seem s to

be the fi rst of the pure V aise sik a works a fter V S .,and

it i s not influenced by the Nyaya so much as i s the case

w i th la ter V a isesik a works .

Uddyota-ka ia

,as a successor of V atsyayana ,

used theV a isesik a doctrines many times in hi s N yd yd -vd rttihct ,and a scr ibed the h ighest author ity (p d ram d rsi ) to

K anadafi’ Jacob i remarks tha t “ th e fus ion o f these t w o

school s began early,and seem s to have been complete a t

th e time when th e N yd yd -vd rttih‘

d w as written The

fus i on cam e for the first t im e f rom the Nyaya,and the

comple ten ess of the fusi on i s on ly on the s ide of the Nyaya,

because P r . E h.,as wel l a s the trea ti se

,are not much

influenced by the Nyaya .

X . V A I S E S I K A TENETS AND THE E ARL Y S ECTS

The V aisesik a i s not a ma ter ia l i sm in th e stri ct s en se o f

the term,because the system acknowl edges other factors

bes ides the four mater ia l a toms,and does not reduce the

former to the latt er ; they are a ll regarded as hav ing the

same va l id i ty . But there i s no doubt tha t a mater ia l i sti c

1 Cf . V idya-bhfisana , Uddyota-kara ,a contemp orary of D harma -kirti

(JR A S . , 1914 , p .

2 Jacobi , A tomic Theory (Has t ings ’E ncyclop ed ia of Religion a nd E thics,

vol . ii, p . 2ol b).

X . V A I S E S IK A TENE TS A ND T H E E AR L Y S ECTS 1 9

t endency dom ina tes the whol e system ,

1and i ts rel ig i ous

and e th i ca l tea ch ing is to a la rge exten t egoi stic and

optim i sti c . Thi s i s,perhaps

,a consequence, of the

characteri sti c of th e system so far as i t i s ma ter ia l i st ic .

S uch a ma ter ia l i sti c and a tom i st i c tendency is not met

wi th in the anci en t Upa oi isctds ;2 consequen tly t he or igin

o f the V aisesik a woul d no t be, tra ceable in the ancien t

Up ctn isads or in any other early l i terature .

A ft er th e tim e of the an ci en t Up an isad s a grea t many

schoo l s , or rath er va ri ous op in i ons , w ere orig inated by

d i ff eren t teachers . A mong them Buddh i sm and Ja inism

are th e m ost prom in en t and influen t ia l system s . The

canon s of both sys tem s agree in descr ibing other m inor

teachers .

T he Buddh i sts are won t to d esigna te th em the s i x

teachers ( tirthahd ) , Purana Ka ssapa ,Mak k hali Gosala ,

A j ita Kesa-kamba l i , P ak udha K accayana ,N igan tha Nata

putta,and S afij aya V e la t thi—putta ,

3 wh i l e the Ja ina s

class i fy them in to th e four schools,K riya

-vada,A k riya

vada,A j fiana-vada ,

and V ainay ik a—vada .

4 Heterodox

and m inor a s they a re,th ey ha v e y e t an importan t

m ean ing in the h i sto ry of Ind ian ph i losophy . They

represen t a gen era l and popula r thought of th e tim e

outs ide the orthodox specu la t ions,which were usua l ly

confined to the sec luded Brahmana s . The gen era l tendency

of the s i x t eachers i s ma ter ia l i st i c in m etaphysics,and

scepti ca l or a k ind of cri ti ci sm of knowledge in episte

mology . We may find the origin of the V aisesik a in the

though t of these t im es .

N ow,A j ita Kesa-k amba li con tends tha t “

a human

1 Cf . H and t , loc . c it . ,p . 28 .

‘

3 Jacobi , A tomic T heory ,p . l 99a .

S clmm'

t'fia p ha tct

-sutta in D .N . I n the Brahma y’

d la -sutta the famous

six ty-tw o sort s o f d i fferent Opin ions are ment ioned .

S BE . ,vol . xlv , pp . xxvi—v ii. Cf . F . O . S chrader, Uber d en. S tand der

indischen P hilosophie zrtr Z eit dia led -virus w ed B uddha s ( S trassburg ,

20 V A I S E S I K A P H I L O S O P H Y

be ing i s bu i l t up of the four el em ents ( cd tur-mahd

bhati/ca ) . When.

he dies , the earthy in him returns and

relapses to the ea rth,the flu id to the water

,the hea t to

the fire, the windy to the a ir,

and h i s facul ti es ( indrfiyd ni ,

the five senses,and th e m ind a s a s i xth ) pa ss i n to space

The opin i on i s a rea l and radi ca l ma teria l i sm ; there i sno sou l nor any other m en ta l factors , but on ly the fi v e

sorts of mater ia l s .2 Body i s the comb inat i on of the fiv e

e lemen ts,and th e soul i s noth ing but body . A j i ta Kesa

kamba li i s probably a Carvak a .

But P ak udha K accayana holds that“ th e fol low ing

se ven th ings ( lcd ya ) are n e i th erl

made nor commanded to

be made , n e i ther crea t ed nor caused to be creat ed,they

a re barren ( so tha t noth ing i s produced out of them )the four el em en ts— ea rth ,

wa t er,fire

,and a ir— and ease

and pa in and th e sou l (j iva ) as a se v en th ” 3

Thi s op in ion canno t be designa t ed a ma ter ia l i sm,because

the sou l has an equa l pos i tion with the other five el em en ts .

but it i s mater ia l i sti c . The abo v e tw o opin ions represen t

the m etaphysi ca l a spect of th e curren t opin i on s of the

t im e ; but there i s as yetlno t ra ce of an a tom i c theory ,

becaus e the e lem en ts are ca l l ed mahd -bhfata or kdya , and

the ea rthy , etc . , in a body return to the correspond ing

e lem en ts . Tha t the body i s bu i l t up of th e el em ents is

1 S E E ,vo l . ii, p . 73 S atra -kg

'tcinga ,

'

ii,1 , 1 5 . Th is is one o f t he

Ucched a -vad a s in the Brahma -j dla -sut ta A kasa A-

kdo‘u) is renderedby ether in t he fo l low ing t rans lat ion o f the t rea t ise Tat ra prthivyad inibhutan i ca t vari ta t t vani tebhya e va d ehakara

'

parina t ebhyah k invad ibhyomad asak t iva t caitanyam upajaya te t e su v inastesu sa t su svayamvinaéya t i

t a t c ait anyav isist ad eha e vatma d ehat irik t a atmani pramanabhavat

pratyak saik apramanavad it aya anumanad er anangikarena pramanya

bharat (S a rva -da rs‘

ana -samgra ha , Cdrvdka -dars’

ana , p .

2 fikas’a is enumera ted as an e lement . S ee S BE . ,vol . x lv , p . x xx iv ( 1 ) .

3 S BB .,vol . ii

,p. 74 ; S u ra -krtd izga ,

ii,1 , 2 1 f . , and i, l , 1 , W . 1 5 —16 .

Th is is the same as the S a ssa ta -vdda in the Brahma -j al a-sutta A ir

(vd yu ) and ease (sukha ) are rendered by w ind and pleasure in the

fo l lowing translat ion o f t he treat ise. S ee P rofessor Gar-be , S amkhyaP hilosophiey pp. 5 —6

X . V A I S E S I K A TENE TS A ND T H E EAR LY SE CTS 2 1

not a producti on ,but a comb ina t ion or aggrega t ion ,

because the el em en ts cannot be m ade nor be created , and

they are barren . How or by wha t sort o f force t hey are

combin ed i s not expla ined .

’

A s a consequen ce of such a ma ter ia l i st i c v i ew , th e

rel igi ous and eth i ca l teach ing must be such as“ to him

who acts,or causes an other to act

,muti lates or causes

another to muti late,pun i shes or causes a nother to pun i sh ,

causes grie f or torm en t , trembl es or causes others to

trembl e,ki l l s a l i vmg crea ture , takes wha t i s not gi ven ,

break s in to houses , comm i ts dacoi ty or robbery or h ighway

robbery,or tel l s l i es

,to him thus a ct ing there i s no gu i l t ,

no increa se of gui l t wou l d ensue I n generosi ty ,

in sel f-ma stery,in con tro l of th e sen ses , in speak ing truth ,

there i s n e i th er m er i t nor increa se of m eri t”

;1

and a s“ th ere i s n e i th er slayer nor causer of slaying ,

hearer or speaker,k nower

‘or ex’

pla iner . When on e with

a sha rp sword clea ves a h ead in twa in ,no one th ereby

d epr i ves anyon e of l i fe,a sword has on ly pen etrated in to

the in ter va l between seven el emen tary substances”

33

The v iew i s hel d by Purana Ka ssapa,A j i ta Kesa

k amba l i,and P ak udha K accayana . For the mater ia l i st s

meri t or any other v i rtue has n o mean ing a t a ll ; a human

be ing i s on l y a m echan i ca l comb inati on of th e fiv e or the

e ight elem en ts and no th ing el se .

“ T here is no such th ing

as a lms or sacrifice or offering . There i s n ei th er fru i t nor

resu l t of good or e v i l d eeds . There i s no such thing as

th i s world or n ext . There is n e ither fath er nor mother

nor being springing in to l i fe w i thou t th em .

” 3 But it

cannot be den i ed by anyon e tha t th ere are some enj oying

happy ci rcum stances in’

th i s l i fe,whi l e others are l i v ing

m i serabl e l i v es . Wha t i s the cause o f th i s ? The

ma ter ia l i st,A j ita Kesa-k amba l i

,cannot give a sa ti sfa ctory

1 S BB . , pp . 69—70. This is ca l led the A kriya t vdda , A k riyz'

i -vada ) .2 Ibid .

,p. 74 .

3 Ib id . ,p. 73 . Th is is a lso ca l led the Uccheda -vdda .

22 V A I S E S I K A PH ILOSOPHY

answ er. P ak udha K accayana ma inta ins that pl easure

(or ease ,sukha ) and pa in (du/ckha ) are a l so eterna l and

a re not a ff ected by any other th ing. By m eans of the

combinat ion o f‘

plcasure and pa in with a body and

the sou l the d i fferen t c i rcum stan ces can be produced .

T he enumera t i on of the sou l , pleasure , and pa in shows tha t

the doctr in e of P ak udha K accayana i s more ad vanced

and speculat i ve than tha t of A j i ta Kesa-kamba l i. ‘

I n

t h i s conn ex ion P ak udha K accayana i s m ore s im i lar to

the V aisesik a than A j i ta Kesa -kambal i .

T he op in i on concern ing pl ea sure and pa in seem s to

lead to the dogma of tran sm i gration,as in th e case of

Mak k hali Grosala 1( th e l eader of the Aj ivak as ) , who

holds,howe v er , a k ind O f fa ta l i sm . A t any ra t e th e

dogma of tran sm igra tion requi red the adm iss ion O f a

certain force , wh ich can an swer the quest i on how the

e lem ents are combined and how the d i fferen t c i rcumstan ces

are produced . I n the V aiéesik a th e force i s ca l l ed ad ’rs ta

( unseen force , dest iny) .

Mak k ha li Gosala ’s op in i on tha t th ere is no such th ing

as power or energy , or human strength or human v i gour ”

seem s to hav e a rela t ion to the op in ion O f S anj aya

V ela t thi-putta,who ma in ta in s I f you ask m e whe ther

there i s another worl d (a ithi p ara loko) ~ —w el l,if I though t

there were,I woul d say so . But I don ’ t say so . A nd

I don ’t th ink it i s t lius or th i s . A nd I don’

t think it i s

otherwi se . A nd I don ’t deny i t . I f you ask me whether

there i s not another world (n’

a tthi para lo/co) whether

there i s and i s not another world (a ithi ca n’

a tthi ca

para loko) whether there n e i ther i s nor i s not another

world (n’

ev’

a tthi n a n’

a tthi para loko)2

The Opin ion i s som et ime s ca l l ed an agnosti cism ;3 but it

1 S BB . , vol . ii, p. 71 . H is Opin ion is ca l led the A dhicca -samuppa nnikdin the Brahma -d a -sut ta S litra -kg

‘td ftga , S BB . , vo l. xlv , pp. 345 ,

“

239 .

2 Ibid . , p . 75 . Cf . the opin ion o f A j i ta Kesa-k am ba li , p . 73. S anjaysV e lat thi-pa t ta ’

s Opin ion is ca l led the A w a rd -V ikkhepa (Brahma -j . ,

3 S BB . ,vol . x lv , pp . xxv i i—vi i i .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

24 V A I S E S I K A P H ILOS OPHY

a tom i c th eory may su i t better than any other , and i t

a l so appea rs to be a na tura l con sequence . The Buddhi st

v i ew o f the four el em en ts (ca ttd ri m ahd -bha tdn i ) in

th e R ap/

alpaclhd na Jehhafndha ,

which d i v id es them in to

two sorts,in ter ior (ajj ha ttiha ) and exterior

s eem s to ha v e been an ea rl i er stage of the de v elop men t

to an a tomic theory . I n those t im es the Ja ina s and the

Aj ivak a s ma in ta ined an a tom i c th eory,wh ich i s most

prim i ti v e .

Jacobi remarks : “ Matter ( in Ja in i sm ) i s an eterna l

substance , undeterm in ed wi th regard to quan ti ty and

qua l i ty,i.e . i t may increase or dim in i sh in volume

wi thout add it ion or loss of particles,and i t may a ssume

any form s and develop any k ind of qua l i t i es . Mater ia l

substan ce s may coa l esce in to on e substance,and on e

substan ce may d i v i de into many . N ow , the Ja in s

ma inta in tha t everything in th i s world ,excep t soul s and

m ere space,i s produced from m a tter (pudga la ) , and tha t

a ll ma tter con si sts of a tom s (paramana ) . E ach atom

occupi es one po int (prades’

a ) of spa ce .

2 Ma tter , howe v er ,may be e i ther in the gross state ( stha la , badara ) , or in

the subtl e ( sfihsma ) . When i t i s in the subtl e sta t e,

innum erabl e atoms of i t occupy the space o f on e gross

a tom . The a tom s are eterna l as regards the i r substances ;each a tom has one k ind of ta ste , sm el l , and colour , and

t w o kinds of touch . These qua l i t i es , however , are not

perman en t and fixed for th e severa l a tom s,but they m a y

be changed and developed in them . Two or more a tom s

wh ich d i ffer in the i r degree O f sm oothn ess and roughness

may combin e to form aggrega t es The figures

formed by the a rrangemen t of the a toms in to groups are

man i fold,and are preci sely described in th e Bhaga va ti

1 I ll ahd -ha tthi-pa dopama -sutta (Majjh . N . , N o . p . 184 f.2 Cf . N . S . 2 , 2 , 18.

3 T he fi ft h A hga (of the Ja ina canon ) , or som et imes ca l led the V iz/aha(or V ivdha )-pa fi fia tt i.

X . V A I S E S I K A TENETS A ND T H E E AR LY S ECTS

e v ery thing i s bel i eved to be form ed of groups of one k ind

on ly .

1 The atom m ay dev elop a motion of its ow n , and

th i s motion may becom e so sw i ft tha t by mean s of i t an

a tom may tra v erse in one m om en t th e whol e un i v erse

from on e end to the other .” 2

The a tom i c theorv of Ja in i sm i s undoubted ly more

speculati v e than th e opin ion of P ak udha K accayana ; but

i t may be seen to ha v e a close rela tion to the latter , or

rather both represen t the curren t thbugh t of th e t im e

in ma teria l istic and atom ist i c theori es . I f th ese th eori es

are logica l ly de veloped,th ey are ea si ly con v erted in to th e

V ais’

esik a theory . A t any rate P ak udha K accayana and

the Ja ina s are probably forerunn ers of the V a is’

esik a .

The op in ion of P ak udha K accayana i s ca l l ed the

A /cr iyd-vd da ,

wh i l e the V ais’

esik a i s ca l l ed th e Kriyd

vd da . Consequen t ly'

the t w o are contradictory on th is

poin t . P ak udha K accayana ma in ta in s,as sta ted above

,

tha t pl ea sure ( sa kha ) and pa in (duhhha ) are eterna l and

substances ( to use th e V aisesik a’

s term ) , just as are th e

sou l and other e lemen t s . There fore , th e Opin ion is named

the A kr iyd-vd da but the V a isesik a classified them am ong

the a ttr ibutes o f se l f ( th e sou l ) and changed the A hriyc’

i

c d da into the E riya-ed da . I f the dogma of tran sm i gra ti on

is acknowledged,pleasure and pa in cannot have a pos i t ion

among substances .

S uch mod ifica t i on s are a lso found w ith regard to the

Ja ina theory .

‘

The a tom ic theory of the V a isesik a i s , as

sta ted in the fol l ow ing n otes,more advan ced than tha t of

the Ja inas ; but th e essen tia l poin ts are n ot changed and

the a ttr ibutes O f a tom s rema in sti l l unfix ed . I n th e

V a isesik a there are d i ff eren t k inds of a tom s correspond ing

to the four e l emen t s , wh i l e in Ja in ism th ere are no t

d i fferen t k inds of a toms . O ther mod ifica t i ons in the

atom i c theory n eed not be m en ti oned here .i

I f we

1 Cf . V . S . 4 , —3 ; 8 , 2 , 4 ; N . S . 3 , l , 28 .

2 A tomic Theory ,pp . 199—200 .

26 varsesrx A PH ILOSOPH Y

c on s ider a t what period an a tom i c theory w as in tro

d uced in to Buddh ism,it wi l l be suggest i ve in this subj ect .

Now in the Pal i Buddhi sm there i s no trace of an

a tom i c theory,a s a sserted by Franke .

1 But in th e

so-ca l l ed northern Buddh ist l i terature we can find an

early trace of the theory .

D harmot tara’

s A bhidha rma -hrdaya-§d stra 2 i s of th i s

op in ion . H i s dat e is sa i d to ha ve been dur ing the

Ts in dyna sty ( 221 — 206 B .C . ) a nd th e H an dynasty

( 201 B .C . 9 A .D . )3 o f Ch ina . A ccord ingly he l i ved about

t he th i rd—s econd cen tury B .C . He sta t es“ A tom s (a im or p aramd im ) in the four sense-organ s

a re of t en k inds ; a tom s in the body a s a sense-organ

( i.e . the’

sk in ) are of n in e k inds , and in the o thers they are

o f e ight k inds . This number o f a tom s are rest ri cted to

the world possessing sm e l l .” 4

A ccord ing to the comm en tar i e s,the t en k inds of a tom s

in the eyes are earth,wa ter

,fire

,wind

,colour

,sm e l l

,ta ste

,

touch,the s igh t-organ (ca ksur-in dr iya ) , and the body

( = touch-)organ . I n th e cases of the o ther three sen se

o rgan s the s igh t-organ as an a tom i s repla ced by the other

t hree sense-o rgan s as the a tom s respec t i vely . The n in e

k inds in the body are the sam e a s the first n in e ( the s ight

organ and th e other three sen se-organ s are except ed ) .

1 S ee Jacobi , A tomic Theory ,p . 199.

2 N o . 1288,trans la ted in 391 A . D . T he tex t consis ts o f 25 0 slok as ;

it has been trans la ted w it h a commen t ary . \V he t her the commen t aryis by the aut hor or

.

not is not c learly k nown but it is perhaps by the

hand o f ano t her,because Dharmo t t ara

’

s text is sa id t o have cons ist ed o f

o n ly 2 5 0 slok as . N O . 1294 is anot her commen tary by Upa-sant a , and

N o . 1287 is a lso a commen tary by D harma-trat a ; but Dharm a-trat ae n larged the origina l tex t and c ommen ted w i t h an advanc ed t heory .

D harma -trat a s a tom ic t heory is quo ted and crit ic ized in t he A bhi

( lha rma -ma hd -vibhasd (N O . vol . c xxvii , p . 5 b f . , t oget herwi t h t he t heory o f Budd ha-deva . a nd in the V ibhd sd -éd stra (N O .

v ol . i, p. 8a v ol . v i,p . 6b ( the t e x t in the L ibrary o f the Ind ia O ff ice ) .

3 P os t script in N O . 1287 (Chu-sdn-tsd h-ci-tsi, vo l . x , p . 5 9b) . O r some

hundred years A . S . (preface in N o .

4 V ol . i, ch . ii, p . 5 6a N O . 1294 , p . 826 N O . 1287, p. 29a—b.

X . V A I S E S I K A TE NETS A ND T H E E A RLY S ECTS 27

I n the others m ean s th ings wh i ch are not sen se-organ s ;th e e ight k inds are the four e lemen ts and th e four qua l i ti es

colours,etc .

,as th e a tom s . “ The world possess ing smel l

i s th e Kama-l oka of the thre e worlds,because there i s no

sm el l and ta ste in the Rupa-l oka,whence a toms in the

Rupa-l oka are l ess than those in the Kama-loka . The

a toms other than smel l and taste are the sam e in both

worlds . 1

I n another pa ssage Dharmo ttara a l so s ta tes tha t th ings.

in th e Obj ect i ve world con s i st of atom s , wh i l e the menta l

( citta and ca ita siha ) does not consi st of atom s . Con

sequen tly a tom s are ma ter ia l . The mean ing of the abo v equota tion may be that there are the e ight k inds of a tom s

in th e obj ecti v e world,and e very sen se-organ has its ow n

a tom ; a sen se-organ i tse l f i s cons idered as a spec ia l a tom ,

because a sen se-organ has a specia l fun ct ion . The four

sen se—organ s other than the skin pa rtake of the a tom of

the sk in,ina smuch as they occupy a part o f the body .

A toms are o f th i rteen sort s . The V iew tha t the a tom s

o f the four el emen ts are d i fferent from tho se of the

four qua l i t i es i s deri v ed from th e fact tha t ea rth,etc .

,

s omet imes ha v e certa in qua l i t i es owing to m ixture w i th

the la t ter , and som e times are wi thout them . The com

mentaries say tha t a tom s are a lways m i xed w ith one

another ?

1 No . 1288 , p . 5 6a ; No . 1294 , p . of . No . 1287, p . 29a—b.

2 A n a tom ic t heory is no t me t w it h in K atyayani-pu tra’

s A Iihidha rma

j fid na -pra sthd na -sastra (N O . 1273 N O . a fundamenta l a nd the

au thori ta t ive work o f the S a rva‘rst i-vada and the t ex t o f the A bhidha rma

ma ha-vibhd sd-s’

d stra (N o . 1263 N O . T he aut hor is sa id t o havel ived d uring the years 200-300 (N o . Bu t in the la t ter workt he a tom ic t heory w as ad ap ted t o expla in t he tex t . A fterward s theS arvas t i-vada t he V a ibhasa schoo l ) ma in ta ins the a tom ic theory , andthe S an t ran t ik a schoo l a lso fo l lows an a tom ic t heory . V asu-bandbu

'

s

A bhidharma -koéa -éd stra (N O . 1269 No . 1267) ho lds the t heory . I n t he

Mad hyam ika schoo l the t heory is rejec ted , wh i le the Y ogac fi ra schoo luses it to expla in the process and the s ta te o f emana t ion o f the phenomena lworld , although the schoo l is idea l ist ic . S ee A sa i

’

iga’

s Y ogd cd rya-bhfl mi

adstra (N O . vol . i, p . 48 M ahdydndbhidharma samgni . s‘astra

28 V A I S E S I K A PH I L OSOPH Y

The abo v e theory i s not yet refin ed,and does not make

d i stinction between substan ces and a ttr ibutes,so tha t

colour , etc. , and e ven the sen se-organ s are enum erated as

a tom s . I n som e respects Dharmottara s theory i s opposed

to th e Ja ina th eory . But in the V a isesik a col our,etc .

,

a re d istingu i shed from earth,etc .

,and cla ss ified among

a ttr ibutes,wh i l e the sen se - Organ s are expla ined as

con si sting ea ch of a part i cu lar one am ong the four

a tom s . The V a isesik a a ccepted the a toms of th e four

el em ents,and cla ssified the four obj ects among a ttr ibutes .

A ccord ingly the above theory appears to represen t an

earl i er stage O f the developmen t of th e a tom i c theory ,

and a t the sam e t ime to ' show tha t an a tom i sti c tendency

per vaded the genera l thought of these t im es .

A ccord ing to the Uttard dhyayan a1 Ja in i sm ma inta in s

that there are three categor i es— substan ce (dra vya ) , qua l i ty

(guna ) , and de velopm en ts (paryd ya ) . S ubs tances are

the substra ta of qua l i t i es ; qua l i t i es are inheren t in on e

substance , and developm en ts have the cha ract eri sti cs tha t

they inhere e i ther in subs tances or in qua l i ties . S ubstan ces

are s ix— m eri t (dharma ) , demeri t (a dhamna ) , space , tim e ,ma tter

,and soul s ; 2 they make up the world . The

cha racter i stic o f mer i t i s mot i on,that of dem eri t immo

bility tha t of space ,3 wh ich con ta in s all other substan ces ,i s tha t i t makes room for e v erything ; that o f tim e i s

dura tion ; 4 that of soul i s rea l i za tion of knowledge , fa i th ,

(N O . vol . i, p . 2a ,it s commen tary

,M ahd ydndbhidha rma -samyukta

samgiti-sastra ,by Budd ha-s imha (compi led by S thira-ma t i ) , (No .

v ol . iii, pp. 3 1a , 39b, and P ra kara zid rya vd cd-S'astra (No . p . 2 1a .

But D ig-naga refu te s the theory in his A lambana-pra tyaya -p ariksd =éd 3 tra

(N o . 1 173 = N o . and o thers . Cf . D harma-pala ’

s commen t ary(N o . 1 174 ) on N o . 1 173 . D harma-pala a lso re futes the t heory in h is

Viifiap t i-nid tra éd -siddhi~sd stra .

1 T he first satra o f the four M ala -smra s , trans la ted in S BB . ,V ol . xlv.

2 D ha rma , a dha rma ,and space are each one subs tance on ly , wh i le

t ime, ma t ter, and sou ls are an infin ite number of subs tances .

3 N a bha s , see notes on ch . ii, 1 , 6 . Srotram p aria h sra va na-rira ra

samj fia ko nabho-d es‘

a h ( P r. E h . ,p .

4 Varia nd .

x . V A I S E S I K A T E N E T s A ND THE E AR LY SE CTS 29

happiness ,and m i sery ; and th e characteri st ic of S oul is

knowledge,fa i th

,conduct

,auster i ti es

,energy

,and rea l iza

t i on ( of i ts d e v elopm en ts) ; and tha t of ma tter i s sound ,

darkn ess , lustre (of j ewel s , l i ght , shade , 1 sun sh ine ,col our

,taste , smel l , and touch . The characteri st i c

o f de ve lopmen t s i s s inglen ess ( eha tva ) , s eparateness

number,form

,conjun cti on

,and d i sjun ction ?

Usua l ly in Ja in i sm the ca tegori es are di v id ed in to two

substance (drav'

ya ) and i ts d e v e lopm en ts (or mod ifica tion s ,

paryd ya ) . The de v el opmen ts include a t t r i butes (guna in

th e V a is’ esik a ) , and l eave no room for the la tter as an

i ndependen t ca t egory . The most importan t d i stin ction

betw een th e V a is’

esik a on th e on e hand and Ja in i sm,

t ogether w ith the oth er school s of the t im e,on the oth er

i s that the former stri ctly d i stingu i sh es subs tan ce i tsel f

from its qua l i ty and quan ti ty,wh i l e the la tter confuses

them 3 w i th each o ther . I n these c i rcum stan ces the

V aisesik a cannot be earl ie r than these school s . The

V a ise sik a,dev el oping the princi pl e systema ti ca l ly

,el i c ited

i ts notion s of substances and a ttr i but es out of the abo v e

doctrines of Ja in ism and the l ik e . A nd probably a ct ion s

(karm a ) , too , were der i v ed from th e sam e doctr ines .

A lmost an outl in e of the three categori es of th e V a isesik a

i s to be found here .

It may be supposed from these considera tions that th eV a is

’

esik a has i ts origin in th e gen era l thought of those

t imes,tha t is

,th e V aiéesik a borrowed the ma teria l s from

the thoughts of those days and systema t i zed them a t

a' somewha t late r t im e . Th i s suppo s i tion can be proved

not on ly by two other ' e v id ences,but a l so by the

description s of K aut ilya and of the s ixth sch i sm in

Ja in i sm .

1 Cf . V . S . 5 , 2 ; 19—20, d ra vya guzi a karma nispa tt i va idha rmydd

abhava s (or, bhd’

bhd va s ) tama h and‘

tej a so dra vyzintarezui ca ra p ds’

ca .

2 S E E , p . 1 5 2 f . S ee E ine Ja ina -D ogma l ilc ( Ta ttvdrthddhigama

ZDMG . , 1906 , p . 5 12 f .3 i bid . , pp. x xxii i-v Sankara on the Brahma s fl lra ,

2 , 2 , 17.

30 V A I S E S I K A PH I LOSOPHY

The V a i sesik a,together w i th the Nyaya ,

is a repre

sen ta tive opponen t of the M imamsa in regard to the dogma

of etern i ty of sound,

1and den i e s th e absolut e authori ty of

the V eda? The V a isesik a contends that human beings

have noth ing inna te in th e i r m inds , but e very idea or

concept resul ts from experi en ces . Con sequen tly the

V ais’

esik a i s an emp ir ism ; but such“ i deas produced by

experi ences are con veyed to others and handed down

to n ext genera t i on s,and become

,a s i t were

,innate

,

3 so

that th e system can reconci l e the c onfl i ct between

empi r i sm and th e theory o f innate idea s . From th i s

standpoin t the V eda i s rega rded as ha v ing an origin

and being buddhi But the system obser v es, on

the one hand ,the duty of the four periods of rel igious

l i fe,

5 etc .,

and es teems the Yoga practi ce ; 6 on the

other hand the sz‘

t tra says,

“ l i kewi se the making away

wi th those who a re con trary,

’ “ making away wi th

another has reference t o an in fer ior ,” “

in the ca se o f

an equa l,su i c ide

,or the destructi on of the other,

” 7and

in l ike manner in the case o f the burst ing open of one

burn t S uch a l l owan ces cou ld n ot be con s isted wi th th e

str ict ru l e s of yogi n s or o ther Observances .9 The former

Observan ces poss ibly cam e from the V eda,the M imamsa

,

or other sources in the course of con tro v ersy aga in st

them ; and the la tt er a l low an ces may be cons idered and

coul d be understood as rema inders of the above-m ent i oned

1_V . S . 2 , 2 , 2 1—37 ; NUS . 2 , 2 , 13—4 0. S ee M uir, O r igina l S a nskrt

T ex ts , 186 1 , pt . iii, pp . 73—1 13.

2 V . S . 6 , 1 1 ff . T he N yaya defend s the au thori ty o f the V edaaga ins t the Carvaka (N . S . 2 , 1 , 5 6—67. O f . the O arvak a-sec t ion in the

S a rva -da rs‘

a na -samgra ha ) .3 S ee notes on Oh . i

,3 , 12 (cogn it ion ) .

4 5 6 , 2 , 2—3 .

6 6 , 2 , 8 ; 5 , e tc .

7 T a tha viruddhdndm tydga h (6 , 1 , hine pa re tydga h and same

(Ztma tydga h p a ra tydgo i d S ee comment arie s on t he sfl tra s and on

6,1 , 12 . I n a word the V a is

’

es ik a , in some cases , perm its t o k i l l othersand t o t ak e wha t is no t given .

8 T a thd dagdha sya visphotane ( 5 , 1 ,9 Cf . 1 ; 6 , 8 .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

32 V A I S E S I K A PH ILOSOPHY

relat ion to them . For instance,the Mimamsa acknowledges

the n in e sorts o f th e m ean s o f knowledge

bu t the m eans of knowl edge ha ve no such ph i l osoph i ca l

import in th e system as in other system s ; they on lys er ve to pro v e that the sacrific ia l injunction s are fa r

super ior to th em? and accord ingly they a re adopted in as

la rge a number as pos s i bl e . The ph i losoph ica l specula t ion s

a l so ser v e the sam e purpose,n e v er s er v e for the foundat i on

of the system . Con sequen tly the ph i losoph ica l theori es

are so loose t ha t em in en t fo l lowers coul d expla in them in

t he i r ow n ways,and th i s l ed to d iff eren t Op in i on s . Those .

t heor i es in th e syst em wh ich are common to the V a isesik a

are due to the recept i v eness o f the system when con t inua l lya t tacked by th e lat ter .

3 Thus th i s system cannot be

con s idered a s the source o f the V aisesik a .

A s f or the A m a ra-V ihhhepa ,t he V a is

’

e sik a d id not

a ccept it as i t w as . A s'

a rea l i st ic system,th e V a is’ esik a

i s con tra ry to the idea l i st i c tenden cy ; n ev erthel ess itw a s influenced by the A ma ra -V ihlchepa . A Ja ina

t radi tion says,indem a l l e d i ese 36

‘

Un terabt e i lungen

( 9 substances , 1 7 a ttr ibutes , 5 action s , 3 un i v ersa l i t i es ,part i cu lari ty and inheren ce ) der sech s Grundprincipien

s i ch un t er v i er Gesichtpunk t e stel l en ,nam lich 1 . den

der P osi tion (Beisp. p udha vi prihivi )‘ 2 den der

Nega t ion der P osi t ion (Be isp. apudhavi ) ; 3 . den der

P roh ib it ion (Beisp. n op i tdha ri ) ; 4 . den der N ega t ion

der P rohibition (Be isp. n o apudha vi ) , so ergeben s i ch

1 I n S ahara -svamin ’

s Bhdsya on AL S . the s ix sort s are enumera ted( pp. 6 , T he Ganda -pada -bhdsya on S . K . v . 4 asserts t hat sambha va ,

p ra t ibha,and a itihya are ack nowledged by Ja im ini. Cf . S . T .

-K aumud i

on v . 5 ; N . S . 2,2,1—12 ; P r. E h. , pp . 2 13—30 .

“3 S ee t he satra s 1 , 1 , 4—5 .

3 That t he sys tem is com prehens ive wi l l be seen in K umarila-bhat ta’

s

S'loka -vdrttika . N o t on ly the V a isesika t heories , but a lso the essen t ia lpart s o f D ig

-naga ’

s logic are ac cepted and t ak en in by K umarila a s

wel l as by P rabha-k ara . A lm os t a ll the variet ie s of logica l t heory fromD ig

-naga dow n to K umarila are con t a ined in the S loka -vdrtt ika on

1 , l , 5 , a utpa ttika -sz'

ttm , sect ions 3 and 5 .

x . V A I S E S I K A T E NE T s AND T H E EARL Y SECTS . 33

d i e 1 4 4 1 Th i s is perhaps a pri or stage of

e numerat ion (uddesa ) , defin ition ( laksana ) , and explana

t i on (parihsd )2; but th e rela tion to th e A mard -V ikkhepa

cannot be den ied ,3 because the above four points of v iew

a re a lm ost the same as th e four modes of expressi on

( a ithi , n’

a tthi , a tthi ca n’

a tthi cd,and n

’

ev’

a tthi n a

n’

a tthi ) . Further,th i s stri ct method of in vesti gation

seem s to ha v e helped the developm en t o f th e V aisesik a

principl e,di stingu i sh ing substan ce i tse l f from a ttr ibutes

and a ctions , and of th e theori es con cern ing the relation

between con cepts and th e i r Obj ects , and of logi c ‘ in the

sy stem .

X I . DA TE or S YS TE MAT IZAT I ON : THE CATE GOR IES

Genera l ly a ph i l osoph i ca l system may be described from

th e three poin ts of v i ew ,epi stemology

,m etaphysi cs , and

eth ics . I n anc i en t t im es m etaphysi cs i s usua l ly pre

d om inan t,and ep i stemology appears a t a la ter time and

in ad van ced ph i losoph ica l speculati on s . Cons equen tly ,

though ep istemology i s rea l ly the foundat ion of meta

physi cs,th e former i s much n egl ected as compared with

the la tte r in the anc i en t h i story of ph i losophy . Th e

epi stemologi ca l fa ctor of the gen era l thought of th e tim e

o f Ma l ia-v ira and Buddha i s not much de v el oped in

the V a isesik a but the essen tia l parts of th e three poin ts

o f v i ew are wel l combined in the system . The facts are

there fore in fa vour of th e con clusion that the origin of

the V aisesik a w as in th e time of Maha-vira and Buddha

( the s i xth—fif th cen tury

1 L eumann ,I nd ische S tud ien , Bd . xv ii i

,p . 12 1 f .

2TV ydya

-kanda li, pp. 26—7 ; IV gtiya-bhagga ,

p . 9 N ydya -w irttika , p . 29 .

3 S ee Brahma -j d la -sutta ,pp . 37-40.

4 S e e notes on ch . i , 3 , 12 (cogn ition ) .A nother ev idence t hat t he origin o f t he V aises ik a is as O ld a s

Ja inism is found in the fac t t ha t t he t erms hetn a nd p ramdna havet he same mean ing in bo t h sys tems . S ee V idyabhusana , H istory of the

Ill ed ieva l S chool of I nd ian L ogic , pp . 4-5 ; V . S . 9, 2 , 4 (hetur apad cso ,

tingamp ramdnamkaranam ity-anarthd nta ram) .

34 V A I S E S I K A PHI L OSOPHY

But the systema t i za t i on of the V a isesik a cannot be

earl i e r than about 300 K aut ilya (Canak ya ) in

h i s A rtha -sastra sta tes tha t ph i losophy i s on ly the

S amk hya ,the Yoga

,and the L okaya ta (Carvak a )

( S amk hyam Yogo L okaya tam ca ity-anv ik sik i) . O ld en

berg remark s,“ dagegen i st d i es k aum z w ei felha ft

,da ss

d i e N i chtn ennung der be iden eng untere inander v erbin

den en S ystem e , den en zu begegn en man h i er noch

erwa rten k O'

nn te , des Nyaya und V a is’

esik a ,in der

T a t auf deren dama l iger N i chtex isten z beruht . D en

A nspruch d nvihsihi (d i e auf P riifung beruhende (Wis

senscha f t ) ) zu se in erhob se iner Ze i t d er Nyaya

eben so en tsche iden wi e berecht igt .

” l Consequen t ly the

systematiza t ion of the V aisesik a i s la ter than 300 B .C .,

probably in the firs t cen tury B .C . , because the

in format ion con cern ing the s ixth sch ism ( 1 8 A D . ) o f

Ja in i sm re v ea l s tha t the V aisesik a had a l ready been

systemat ized be fore the beginn ing of the Chri stian era .

Th i s does not,howe v er

,d i rectly refer to th e da te of the

compi la tion of V .S . V S . seem s to ha v e been composed

earl i er than the other sfi tra s ; but i t presupposes not on l y

the Mimamsa and th e S amkhya , but a l so the V edan ta

and others ? O n the other hand ,the V a ise sik a doctr ines

in V S . represen t the earl i er , perhaps the genuine , doctrines

of the system— a t l eas t the doctr in es preva i l ing before the

t ime of the s ixth sch i sm in Ja in i sm,and th e orthodoxo f

the system .

A d ist in ct characteri st i c o f th e V ais’

esik a is a sharp

and s tr i ct ana lys i s o f an obj ect . The si x ca tegori es are

o n ly the s i x mod es of obser va t i on and of the explana t i on

o f an obj ect . The d ist inct ion between substan ce and its

1 D is ind ische P hilosop hie (Kultur d er Gegenw a rt , al lg . Geech. d .

pp. 32—4 ; Jacob i , Z ar Frtthgeschichte d er indischen P hilosophie , pp . 736 ,

738, 743.

1 E spec ia l ly see 2 , 1 20 (re ly ing on the commentaries ) ; 3, 1 , 1 25 , 2 , 19-20 ; 7, 2 , 3

—8 ; 7, 2 , 13 ; 9 , 2 , 3 .

X 1 . D ATE O F SYSTEMATIZA T I O N : T H E CATEGOR I ES 3 5

a ttr ibutes and acti ons 1 i s one of the fundam en ta l

pr inc ip l es . I t l eads to th e th eory of th e A sa t-hctrya

rd da and sel f (d tm an ) d i stingu i sh ed from cogn i tion

( buddhi) . But the rela t i on between the fourth and th e

fi fth ca tegory ,un i v ersa l i ty ( sc

‘

tman ya ) and parti cular i ty

(v isesa ) , i s not in a ccordan ce w i th the above -noted

chara ct eri sti c , because an obj ect i s,on th e one hand ,

class ified under un i versa l i ty ,and

,on th e other hand

,

under parti cula r i ty ,so tha t it " ’

cannot be fixed in a

defin i te cat egory . Th i s i s a na tura l con sequence of the

conceptua l r elat ion s , as in the cas e of the classifi ca tion

of concepts in forma l logi c ; but from the prin cipl e o f

the system i t i s no t so. stri ct as the other categor ies .

V ar ious op in i on s on th i s po in t arose e ven before the

Christian era . Roha-gutta,the ch i ef teacher in the s i xth

sch ism of Ja in i sm ( Tra irct éiha -ma tam,5 4 4 A .V . 1 8 2

imported the V a isesik a doctrin es into Ja in ism . Its fi rst

three categori es and the last ( si xth) are just th e same a s

enum era t ed in V .S . but the fourth,un i versa l i ty

,and the

fi f th,part icu lari ty , are d i fferen t from those O f the sf i tra .

The orig ina l run s :

sainannam t iviham : 1 . maha - samannar’

n,2 . sa tta

sama nnar’

n, 3 . samanna-visesa—samannam.

tatra mahasamanyam sa tsv api padarthesu padarthatva

buddh i -kar i sa t tasamanyam bh‘

u-padartha-sad

buddh i-vidhay i— samanya-v ise sa-samanyam 3 dra r

ya t vadi 3 ( I ) . anye tu vyacak sa te : (mahasamanyar’

n)bh l

'

i -padartha-sa t-kar i sat tasamanyam dra vyat vad i

samanya-visesah prthivitvad ih ( II ) .

viseso egaviho ; e va I'

n anne bhanan ti samannam

duvihai‘

n param aparam ca ( III ) ; viseso duviho

an ta-viseso anan ta-v iseso ya .

”

The S ansk rt equi va l en t of un iversa l ity has been rendered

1 Cf . S BB .,vol . x lv

,p . x xxi i i f . and no tes on O h . i , 1 , 1 , and oh . ii, 2 , 1 1 .

‘1 I nd ische S t itdien , xvii i , pp . 12 1 f . , and S BB . ,p . xxxv i i f . (A va s

‘

ya ka ,

t he second of the four M ala -sz'

t tra s,W . 77

V A l S E S I K A P H I L O S O P H Y

i nto Ch inese by va r ious t erms : genera l i ty ,un i v ersa l i ty

,

’

ex istence ,

” great un i versa l i ty,

and grea t ex i stence

T he first two are tran sla t ion s of sainanya ,the th ird

is tha t of sa ttd or bhdva , wh i l e the fourth i s e v iden tly

tha t of mahd -samanga . The fifth m i ght be a tran s la ti on

o f mahd -sa tta,but the ~ term is not met with in a ny

work . I t i s perhaps a t ran sla t ion of sa ttd mod ified by

t he ana logy of the fourth . These Chin ese equ i va l en t s may

s how tha t there were a l so d ifferen t opin ions concern ing

t he fourth ca tegory,e ven in la ter t im es

,and that the t erm

mahd -samanga w as sti l l used . Tha t the term sci /manga

fvis

‘

esa un i versa l i ty-part i cu lari ty ) occurs in th e Ch inese

t ran sla t ions has a l ready been poin ted out in th e preced ing

passage ; it'

w as no t classed under the fourth category,but

t he fifth ca tegory i tse l f w as ca l led samanga-visesa ?

The three subd i v i s i ons of samanga in th e abo v e

quota tion from the Ja ina record are not known to V .S .,

P r. Bh.,the presen t treat i se , or to any other works ,

a nd the three d i fferen t Op in i on s ( I , II , III , in th e abo v e

quota t ion ) concern ing the subd i v i s i on s cam e from d iff eren t

points of v i ew .

I n the first op in ion ( I ) , i.e . the Op in i on of Roha

gut ta,the m aht

’

t -stiman ga corresponds to a bhidheya ti‘

a

(“capabi l i ty of be ing designa ted and j neya tva

(“ knowablen ess a s common properti es ( sddharmya )O f th e s i x cat egor ies in Bh. , and to “ knowabl e ”

in

our t rea t i se .

3 Thi s v i ew w as probably suggested by V S .

1,1,

A s it is appl i ed on ly to the ca tegor ies,th e

1 T he first is used in the trans la t ions o f the Sa ta -sd stra and the S a tya

s iddhi-sd stra (bo t h by Kumara-j iva ) , and o f the Upd ya -kauéa lya

-hrda ya

gastra (by Kehaya ) , t he second a nd the fourt h in the transla t ion o f our

t rea t ise (by Yuan Chwang ) , and t he second to t he fi fth in K w h é i-c i'

s

commentaries on Nos . 1 197 and 12 16 .

2 S ee no tes on Oh . i, 10 (commonness ) .3 P r. Bh . , p . 16 , and n otes on Oh . ii, 1 1 .

1,1 , 8 runs , sad anitya t vam d ravy ava t karyam karanam S amanya

v isesa vad it i dravya-guna-k armanam av isesah . T he o ther t hree ca tegorie s rela te t o the same obj ec t , in wh ich the firs t t hree categoriesres ide .

X 1. DATE O F S Y ST E MA T IZ A T I O N Z T H E CATEGOR IE S 37

m ahd -sc‘

tmd nya does no t rela te to the con tents of the

ca tegori es ; but the samanga ,l ower than th e ma fia

s ttmc‘

tn ya ,includes the con ten ts of th e categori es and

rela t es to th e vis’

esa,so tha t the l ower s t

’

iman ga is

ca l l ed saman ga-e iéesa . The sa tta—samanga correspond s

exact ly to sa tte‘

t or bht’

t va in V .S .

1 T he d i v i sion of m aha

sdmany t t and sanianga-vis

’

esa spr ings from th e same poin t

o f v i ew (padd rtha tt‘

a,category-n ess

,

”

and dravya tva ,

substance-n ess,

”e tc . ,

as th e Obj ecti v e ent i ti es correspond ing

to the subj ect i ve concepts of ca tegory and substance ,e tc ) , wh i l e th e sa ttd -stimanga com es from the not ion

wi th rega rd to the bhit -padd rtha1 tha t tha t i s ex i sten t .

Both ed itt‘

i -sam an ga and sct inctnya-viéesa hav e the sam e

s cope,and sc

’

tmd nya-viéesa na tura l ly impl i e s ex i sten ce .

E ven mahd -sdm d nya must imply ex i stence . P r. E h .

a scribes ex i stence ( a stitva ) to th e s ix categor i e s a s a

common qua l ity ( sddharmya ) . A ccord ingly, padartha tva

in p add rtha t'

va -buddhi-ho’

tri impl i e s ex i sten ce ( sad ,in

blud -padc’

irtha -sad-buddhi S a tta-saman ga ,there

fore , turn s out to be superfluous , and the three subd i v i sion s

a re reduced to two . I f bhi‘

t -pado‘

trtha shoul d mean th e

s ix ca tegories,the mahd —sdmo

‘

tnya and th e sa tta-samanga

would,a fter a ll

,become on e . The th i rd op in i on ( II I ,

pa ram apafran

'

i ca ) probably accepted such a consequence .

Thi s th i rd Op in ion w as adopted by P r. E h. ,wh ich ma in ta ins

tha t the para -sama‘

nga (“the h ighest un i v ersa l i ty ”

) is

sa tta, wh i l e th e apara -samanga (“ th e lower un iversa l i ty

”

)

i nc ludes sain t—

m ya-‘viseed -sdmd nya in the first op in i on ,

a nd anan ta -viseso ( a na n tya -visesa ) , the s econd sort of

v iseso Con sequently,the m sesa (

“ parti cular ity

co nta in s an ta -viseso (an tya -vis’

esa ,th e fina l spec ies or the

ul t imate particula rs ”

) a l on e . The second op in i on ( 11) is

too art ificia l .

The fi fth ca tegory, visesa

,i s not usua l ly subd i v ided .

1 t Z-pa d tirtha inc ludes the firs t t hree ca tegories . S ee P r. E h . ,

pp. 17, 19 .

38 V A I S E S I K A PHILOS OPHY

E ven P r. E h. does not know the two sorts of v iéesa ,

but a s im i lar subd i v i s ion i s me t wi th in K w h é i-c i ’s

commen ta ry .

1

These d iff eren t op in i on s show that the in ten t ion w as

to cla ss i fy th ings e i ther under un i v ersa l i ty on under

particular ity,and to fix them in the defin i te classes .

A t the same t ime they pro v e that th e systema ti zati on

o f the V a iSesik a theoriesi

conta ined in V S . took place in

a t ime d istan t from 1 8 A .D. Bes ides , tha t the Ja ina s

them se l v es ma in ta in tha t th e V a is’ esik a system w as

establ i shed by Roha-gutta i s a good rea son for hol d ing

tha t the sys tema ti za tion -w as not very near to the s i xth

s chi sm,because

,had th e systemat izat ion been v ery recen t

,

they cou ld not ha ve cla imed to be th e founders ? O n th e

other hand,i t may be supposed tha t the systematiza tion

d id not take place a t a t ime v ery remote from th e sch i sm :

otherwi se the Ja ina s cou l d not ha v e conn ect ed Roha-gut ta

wi th its origina t ion ,because the founder wou ld have been

conce i ved a s a l egendary personage . The probabi l it i es are

in fa vour of e v en the m iddl e of the first century as

the date of the sys temat i za t ion .

XI I ; T H E S UT R A ; E V IDENCE FO R DAT I NG : 1 . T H E

V I B H A S A,E T C .

We ha ve now establ i shed the da te of the supposed

or igin and systemati za t ion of the V a iSesik a ,and l ea rned

a l i tt l e in out l in e of the doctrina l d e v elopm en t . We sha l l

n ext proceed to Obta in som e ma teria l s concern ing th e da t e

o f V S . and the de velopm en t of the doctr in es from Ch in ese

t ran sla t ions .

1 . To begin with,we sha l l fi rst refer to the A bhidharm a

mahd -vibhd sd -Sastra ,

3 which w as composed by V asu-m i tra

1 S ee notes on ch . i, 10 (commonness ) .2 S BB . ,

vo l . x lv ,pp. x xxvi i—v ii i.

'3 S ee supra . V o l . c x i ii , p . 5 311 .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

4 0 V A I S E S I K A PH ILOSOPHY

2. A sva—gbosa in his S it trd lanhara 1 sta tes : “ O nce there

l i v ed a Bralnnana ,K auéik a by nam e

,w ho had thoroughly

mastered the S d iii/c/tya-éd stra

,th e V a iéesiha -s

’

astra,and

t he s’

d s tra o f Jnat i-put ra K ausik a sa i d to h i s fri end,

Why do you l ook down upon the teach ings of our

Buddha so much ? The V a is’esiha -s‘

astra i s so defec t i v e

tha t i t is by n o m ean s to be compared wi th the teach ings

o f Buddha . The s’

d strtt cannot properly expla in what

an obj ect i s , and m i sunderstand s causa l i ty The

friend a sked him,

‘ For wha t reason can you a ssert tha t

the V a iées iha -éd stra does not properly expla in causa l i ty

The Stistra expla ins tha t broken potsherds are the cause

o f a pot . How can i t be sa i d tha t th e sastra cannot

properly expla in causa l i ty ? ’

K auéik a answered,

‘ I f the

V a iéesi/ca -s’

astra rea l ly assert i t,th e assertion i s nons en se .

Threads ha v ing becom e warp and woof are,as e v eryon e

knows,the cause of a cloth . Just so in the case of a po t

a nd a j ar. When a pot has ex i sted , there can be pot

sherds ; but i t i s n e v er the case that there are potsherds

w ithout a pot hav ing exi sted . Befo re a pot has been

broken into potsherds , th e pot is of use . Broken pot

sherds are,th ere fore

,by no m ean s th e cause of a pot .

A pot ter makes , i t i s certa in ,a pot from clay

,but n e v er

from potsherds Before Buddha , who has da s’

a ba la

1 N o . 1 182 , translated by Kumara-j iva in 405 A . D . T he work ha s bee nt rans la ted in to French by Edouard Huber (A s

’

vaghosa , S atrd la iikd ra ,

P aris ,2 Sastra in suc h c ases d oes not denote a spec ia l work , bu t s imply

m eans d oc trine I n anot her passage Kumara-j iva used t he S arah-hyas f ara and the V a is esika -si

'

ttra . S ittra a lso means d oc trineJ fiati-put ra is Z ho -thi-sw ei-mo (or J o -t

’i-souei-mo ) in Chine se .

Z ho-thi (J o-t’

i) is eviden t ly the transl iterat ion of Na-t i ( z J fiat i) , whi leS mei-mo (souei-mo ) is d oubt ful . I n Buddh is t work s t he samkhya , the

V a iéesik a , the N irg ran thas , and the Jnat i-putras are c onnec ted wi th one

a nother in respec t to the ir Opin ions ; ac cord ingly I have ven t ured to

replace Zho-thi-sw ei-mo by Jfid ti-putra . I n such cases t he i at i-pu tra sare ca l led A j ivak as , wh i le the N irgran thas are ca l led nak ed med ican ts(D ig-ambara ) . S BB . ,

vol . x lv, pp. xx ix—xxx .

xn . THE S UT R a ; DATE : 2 . A S V A -GH O S A 4 1

(“ten sorts of power came to th e w orld

, a ll creatures

were so uncu l tiva ted and bl ind to truth tha t t hey

l ooked upon th e V a zses i/ca -sastra a s the best . But

a ft er our Buddha , the sun,appeared and shon e

,wi sdom

( of crea tures ) becam e cl ea r , so tha t the V a iéesika -s’

d sira

w as known not to con ta in any rea sonabl e explana

t i on and to be good for noth ing , l i ke an owl tha t i s

fly ing and energeti c a t n i gh t and concea l s i tsel f and i s

no t energetic in th e daytime

Broken potsh erd s are th e cause of a pot i s no t m et

w i th in V S , but“ threads are the cause of a cl oth i s

a hackn eyed m etaphor in the V a isesik a .

3 P otsh erds as

broken p ieces cannot , as i t stands , be the cause of othe r

pots ; but th i s example probably m ean s tha t potsherd s

a re in essen ce the sam e’

a s clay, and the d i fference between

them come s from th e d ifference of the sta te , tha t i s , clay

i s ca l l ed so before i t has becom e a pot,and potsherds

ex i st a fter a pot has been broken .

4 P erhaps an imperfect

i l lustra tion o f the A sa t-kd rya -ed da . The example of an

ow l poss ibly cam e from the m ean ing of U luka and does

no t appea r to be an acc id en ta l co in c id ence . Ci-tsan and

K w hé i-c i may ha v e fol lowed A sva-gbosa in the explana

t i on . A s‘

va-gbosa placed th e o rigin of th e V a isesik a in

a t ime before Buddha ; but,

a s stated abo v e,there

w a s before Buddha as yet no t heory s im i lar to th e

V aisesik a . We there fore understand tha t Kanada w as ,

e v en a t the tim e of A sva-gbosa ,known to ha v e been a n

a nci en t R si,and tha t th e fol lowers o f the V aisesik a had

t ra ced the i r doctrine back to th i s anci en t R si, who w a s ,

n everthel ess,no t th e rea l founder , i f h e indeed l i ved in

a time p r ior to Buddha .

Al ahd -ryutpa t ti, vn .

2 V o l . i, pp . 72a , 73b.

3 Upa skd ra ,on 2 , l , 22 ; 5 , 2 , 24 ; 10, 2 , 3 ; 10, 2 , 5 .

Th is may be c ompared w ith N ydya -bhd sya ,on 4 , 1 , 16 , and N ydya

w irttika , p. 4 5 8 . [I n the later V a isesika work s the t w o kapd la s .

sherd s , o ften occur as the ma teria l cause of po t— F. W. T . ]

4 2 V A I S E S I K A PH ILOSOPHY

3 . Before proceed ing further we ha ve t o study the

dates of Nagarj una , De va (A rya-deva ) , Ha ri-varman,and

others .

S an-cao ( S O -j o) , a famous d i sci ple O f Kumara-j i va,

1

sta t es that De va l i ved 800 —900 A .N .

2 A ccord ing to

Yuan Chw ang’

s S i-yiL-ci Deva seems to ha v e seen

H agarj una when Nagarj una w as pa ss ing hi s days on

the S ri-parvata n ea r the Ri ver K istna . Nagarjuna l i ved

about 7 5 0—85 0 A .N .

S an-j w ei ( S o-ye i ) , another d i sc ipl e of Kumara-j iva ,says

tha t A sva-ghosa cam e to th e worl d a fter the t im e o f the

Can-fa ( she-be ) , and Nagarjuna cam e a t the end of t he

tim e of the Hs iang-fa (zO -bo) .s He quot es an Ind ian

t radi t i on wh i ch says,i f A sva-gbosa and Nagarj una had

not com e in to the world a t t im es fol l owing respecti vely

that o f th e Can-fa and tha t o f the Hs iang-f é,th e

tea ch ings o f our Buddha woul d ha ve ser ious ly decl ined

and woul d have cea sed to exi st .

” 3 N ow the tim e of th e

Can-fa i s th e dura t ion of 5 00 yea rs A .N .,and that of the

Hsiang-fa is another 5 00 yea rs a fter the Can-fa according

to Nagarj una and k i-j w e i 4 ( E -ye i ) , another d i scipl e o f

Kumara -j iva . Con sequen t ly A sva-ghosa mav be placed

in 6 5 0 A .N . and Nagarj una in 800 A .N .

Har i-varman i s sa i d to ha v e l i ved in the 9o0th year

1 Kumara-j iva is the first trans la t or o f work s o f the t hree grea tBuddhis t s .

2 I n h is pre face to the trans la t ion o f the Sa ta -s‘d stra (C’hu-sdn-tad il-ci-tsi,

p . 62a ) 800—900 A . N . is l i tera lly 800 and some years3 I n h is preface t o the trans la t ion o f t he P raj fid -pdramitd -s

’

d stra

(N O . 1 169) ofiagarjuna , trans la ted by Kumara-j iva (Chu-sd n-tsdfi-ci-tsi,

p . GOa — b) .4 Clm -sd n-tstw -ci-tsi, p . 307) M a hd -praj fid -p d ramit -s

‘

astra , vo l . ii,

p . 16a ; v ol . l xvi i , p . S om e Buddhist s expla in t ha t the Can-f é ist he dura t ion o f 1000 years A . N . but t h is Opin ion does no t ma t ter int he presen t case , because the au thori t ies o f the above d iscuss ion are t he

d isc iples o f Kumara -jiva and Nagarjuna h im se l f. Can-fa l i t era l ly means

the true law (sa d t he true law o f B udd ha rema ins for5 00 years A .N . as it w as , wh i le d uring the t ime o f the H s iang-fa the tlaw d ec l ines .

x 11. T H E S UT R A ; DATE : 3 . N A GA RJUNA ,DEVA

,ETC . 4 3

i.e . 800—900,according to Yuan-Ch

’

ang ,

land in 890 A .N .

a ccord ing to S an-j w ei.2 Ha r i-varman w as a d i sc ipl e of

Kumara -labdha of the S arvast i-vada .

3

The da te of th e N i r vana held by Kumara-j iva and h i s

d i sc ipl es i s 637 B .C .

4 Hen ce we con clude th e fol low ing

da tes : A sva-ghosa l i v ed about 1 3 A .D .,Nagarj una abou t

1 1 3— 21 3 A .D .,De va about 1 63— 263 A .D .

,and Har i-varman

about 260 or 270 A .D .

There are more than fi fty d i fferen t trad i ti ons of the

date of the N i rvana in Ch inese Buddh i st works . The

dat e 637 B .C . is one of them . The presen t wri ter does

not m ean tha t 637 B .C . i s th e on ly poss ibl e date of the

N i rvana ; but he holds tha t the da tes s ta ted abo v e mus t

be ca l cula ted from the da te of th e N i rvana held by

Kumara-j i va and h i s d i sc ipl es .

Yuan Chwang rema rks,

“ in h i s (Kumara-labdha’

s )tim e A sva-ghosa in th e ea st , De va in the south ,

Nagarj unain the west

,and Kumara-labdha in the north were ca l l ed

the Four S h in ing S un s .” 5 A sva-gbosa w as

,accord ing to

th e trad iti ons,a d i scipl e of Pars

'

va 6and a copy i st or a

wri ter in the fourth Buddh i st Counci l under Kan i ska .

7

A ccord ing to ano ther t radi tion the success i v e order o f

Buddh i st P a t ria rch i s “ Parsva — P unya-yasas — A sva

gbosa Kap i-ma la Nagarj una De va Nagarj uxia

1 I n his L if e of H a ri-va rman , se e before.2 I n h is preface t o t hé S a tya -si

'

ddhi-éd stra (N o . 1274 , trans la ted bvKumara-j iva ) o f Hari-varman .

3 A verse by K nmara -labdha is quoted by V asu-bandhu in his

A hhidha rma -kosa -s’

d stra . A ccord ing t o Yuan Chwang Kumara-Iabd haw as a fo l lower o f t he S aut ran t ika (S i-y ié-ci, v o l . x ii, p . 63a ) . T he

S aut ran t ik a is an advanced branch o f the S arvast i-vada .

4 Bnk kyo-Da inempyo ( The Chronology of B uddhism , Tokyo ,

In trod . ,p . 12 .

5 S i-y e’

i-ci, vo l . xn, 63a . VV a t ters , ii, p . 286 .

6 L if e of the Bodhi sa ttva, A s‘

va -ghosa (No . p .

7 L if e of Va su-ba ndhu (N o . p . 1 16b ; P ro fessor T ak ak usu ,

A S tudy oj'

l ’a ramd rtha

’

s L if e of Va sn-ba ndhn ,JRA S . 1905 , p . 39.

8 N O . 1340 (Record on the N idana o f transm it t ing t he D ha rma -p ifa ka ) ,p . 399 .

4 4 V A I S E S I K A PH ILOSOPH v

m ent ion s Parsva in h i s ill aha-p raj fia-param itaa nd the substan ce of wha t he sta te s agrees

,to some

ex ten t , wi th N o . 1 34 0 . He a l so sta t es in the sam e

work,

“ K accayana ( = K a tyayan i-put ra ) compo sed the

(A bhidha rma -y’

fid na -p ra sthd na-sa t ) u in e igh t gran tha s

( A s ta-grantha )2

a ft erwards fol l owers o f h i s compos ed

the V ibhasd ( or because Buddh i sts in la t er

t imes ( later than the author ) cou ld not (or w i l l not )thoroughly unders tand the e igh t gra n tha s .

’ 3 This

V ol . xc ix , p. 99a .

2 Th is is N o . 1273 No . 1275 . S e'

d ra is somet imes confused wi thM atra by Kumara-j iva .

3 V ol . ii, p . l 8a ; c f . v ol . iv ,p . 34b ; v ol . xxxvi i i

,p . 102a .

T he d a te o f A sva-ghosa is one o f the m os t d ifficul t quest ion s amongCh ine se and Japanese Buddh is ts , because the M ahd -yd im

-éra dd hotpd da

adatra (N o . 125 0 N o . one o f the fundamen ta l and the mos t

systema t ic work s o f the M aha-yana Buddh ism ,is ascribed t o h im , and

the ques t ion o f h is d a te is , accord ingly , connec ted w i th the origin o f the

M alia-yana ,wh i le his L if e doe s not sugges t t ha t he w as a M ahayan is t and

the a uthor o f the work . Bes ides , the fac t tha t t he d oc trines con t a inedin the work are con trary in some po in t s to the d oc trines o f the Fa-hs iangt sung (bo th have s im i lar doc trines ) ad d s to t he d i fficul ty o f the ques t ion .

Though it is c lear from N o . 1340 t ha t he k new t he P raj fid -pa‘

ramita

d oc trine , the quest ion is st i l l undec ided . S ome wri ters bel ieve , t ha tt here were t w o persons named A sva-gbosa ,

rely ing upon a trad it ion heldamong the S arvas t ivad ins (men t ioned bv S an-y in in h is Chu-sd n-tsah

ci-tsi, p . 72a—b) . Bu t t his is on ly a me n t ion o f the name without an y

a c coun t o f h im ,and is on ly by hearsay . Nevert heless , t he presen t

wri ter con ten t s h im sel f , a t the presen t t ime, w ith t he above d a te , re ly ingupon t he o ld es t a nd na t ive trad it ion , and regard s t he quest ion o f A .

’

s

d a t e as d i fferent from t ha t o f t he au t hor o f the work ,which is not a lways

a scribed t o h im bv o ld trad it ions , and from t ha t o f the origin o f the

M aha-yana .

Nagarjuna’s d a te has a lso many d iff eren t trad i t ions . Genera l ly t he

d at e is bel ieved t o be 700 A . N . I t s source is in t he I ll a hd -mdg/d-satra

(No . 382 , t rans la ted in 479—5 02 where t he Buddha prophesiest hat Nagarj una w il l be born 700 A . N . But t he da te o f the N irvanahe ld by the au t hor o f the S um is no t k nown , and t he S fl tra is no t

rel iable ; it cons is t s o f a co l lec t ion , so t o speak , of m a teria ls from the

JI ahd -pam’

nibbd na -sutta and o ther s at ra e , or from unk nown sources .

Nagarjuna’

s d ate is , at the earlies t , und oubted ly la ter t han 5 00 years A . N .

be cause in his P raj fi d-paramita-sastra ,vo l . ii, p . 16a vo l . xxx , p .

v ol . xxxv , p . 84a ; v ol . lx iii,p . 14a ; vo l . l xvi i , p . he sta te s t hat

B uddh is t schoo ls were orig ina t ed a fte r 5 00 years A .N .

x n . THE s nrm ; DATE : 3 . NA G A RJUN A , DEVA , ETC. 4 5

passage clea rly shows tha t Nagarj una kn ew abou t th e

comp i la t i on of the A bhidha Tma -fmaha-v ibhd sa-sd stra in

the fourth Coun c i l . Con sequen tly , A sva-ghosa ,as a

d isc i pl e of P arsva,seem s to be a l i t t l e ea rl i er than

Nagarj una ,just a s Har i-varman

,a d i sc ip l e of Kumara

labdha ,i s a l i t t l e lat er than Nagarj una . Kumara-j iva

’

s

t rad it ion i s on e of th e old est .

Har i-varman’

s S a tya-siddhi-éastra has no commen ta ry

but Nagarj una’

s Ill adhyam ika -éd stra1and De v a ’s S ara

s’

d stra ha ve comm en tar i e s by Ind ian authors . The com

m en tary on the form er is by P inga la,

2and th a t on the

la tter i s by the Bodh i -sa ttva V a su . S ome scholars bel i e v e

that P inga la ( or P inga la-n et ra or N i la-n etra) i s another

nam e of De va .

3 But Kumara-j i va and h i s d i sci pl es n e v er

suggest tha t th e comm entator w as De va . N or do they

a ssert that th e Bodhi -sa ttva V asu i s the sam e person as

the famous Bodh i-satt va V a su-bandhu ‘

but Ci -tsan,th e

comm en ta tor on th e tran sla t i on of the work , a sserts tha t

V asu i s V asu-bandhu ,

4and P er i 5 i s of th e sam e Opin ion .

Be tha t as it may , the Md dhyami/ca -s‘

d stra and the Sa ta

s‘

d stra w ere tran s la ted in 409 and 4 04 A .D . Kumara -j i va

( 0 . 340—4 13 a ccord ing to h i s L if e, had been in structed

in thes e work s about 3 5 3 A D . by S arya-soma in S ha-chu'

1 N o . 1 179. T he work has been tra ns la t ed by lV a llese r from Ch inesein to Germ an (Heidel berg ,

2 p . 23a ,— S an-j w ei says in h is preface t o the work tha t there were

many commentaries on it in Ind ia t he c omment ary w as by a Brahma

carin , or a Brahmana,P inga la

,t he B lue-eyed in Ch inese w ho devo te d

h imsel f t o the doc trine but his commen tary w as no t perfec t , so t ha t thet ra ns lat or

,Kumara-j iva , fi l led up and om it ted some passages .

3 N anj io’

s , A pp . i , 4 . Wa l lese r iden t i fie s P inga la-a k sa W it h V ima lak sa

( Introd . , pp . x-x i ii ) . Nagarjuna is said t o have quoted a verse o f Deva inh is A kutobhaya , a commentary on the 111 (7clhg/a 7m

'

lca -sd stra ( \V a lleser, D ie

m ittlere L ehre , H e idelberg , 19 1 1 , p . I n the Chine se trans la t ion( p. 5 7a ) the verse a lso occurs a s a verse o f the Ca l ah -s

'

a ta -pa rika i

(c f . Tara-natha ’

s Geschichte, p . 83 ) but in Bhava-v ivek a ’

s P raj fid -d t‘

p a

ad stra (N o . anot her commen t ary , the verse is om i t ted (p. 138b) .

I n his sub-commen tary D a im’

hon-zokuzekyé , 73, bk . 5 , p . 372a .

5 V . S m i th , 10 0 . c it . , p . 329 (N . P eri, A p rop os d e la da te d e Va su

bandhu,Bul l . d e I ’E cole fr. d ’

E xtréme-O rient , t . x i,191 1 , pp . 339

4 6 V A I S E S I K A PH ILOSOPH Y

(Ya rkand ,

1a prov ince in Ch inese Turkestan ) . A ccord ingly

P inga la and V a su l i v ed during 1 5 0— 300 A .D . The specia l

doctrines or opin ion s in the comm en tari es m ay be cons idered

as ha v ing pre va i l ed during tha t peri od .

4 . Nagarj una m en t i on s th e S amkhya (Kapi la ) , th e Yoga ,

and th e V aisesik a (Ulfik a ) in his Duéa -bham i-vibhd sct

sastfra 2; but the most importan t passages are found in h i s

grea t work,th e Muha—

pruj fi d -parmnitd -éd stru . Here,

ha v ing sta ted th e theory wh ich says tha t time (hala ) i s

the cause of every th ing in the world,and ha v ing quoted

t w o verses ,3 he says :“ A nother ma in ta ins tha t a ll th ings

in the world , e .g . hea ven and earth,agreeable and di sagree

abl e th ings , are not cons id ered a s products of tim e . But

t ime is un changeabl e and has the rea l exi sten ce relating

to a cause ( V S . 2,2,7— 9 ; 5 , 2 ,

26 ; 7 ,1,

The

substance t ime , being subtl e , cannot be seen ,nor k nown

( by the sense-organ s ) . I t is,howe v er

,in ferred from th e

e ffect s l ike ( the Open ing of ) flowers and ( the r ipen ing of )fru i t s . Tha t i s to say ,

by the marks —the past year and

the presen t yea r , poster iori ty and pr iori ty,s lown ess and

qui ckn ess— t ime i s know n as exi st en t , howe v er inv i si bl e

( 2 ,2,

Thi s reason ing is tha t from effect to cause .

” 4

A s for space (dih) , he does not accept i t as a substan ce ,but he acknowledges i t from the standpoin t of common

sense (vyd vaharihu ) , because , in h i s idea l i stic ph i losophy ,

its rea l i ty i s not a scerta in ed .

1 P ro fessor S h ira t ori , A S tudy on Ta -yuan-kuo in “ H an D yna sty

(T he Toyo-ga k uho, R e ports o f the inves t igat ions o f the O rien t al S oc iety ,v o l . v i

,N o . 1 , pp . 5 ,

2 N o . 1 180, v o l . iii, p . 1 1a ; E ka -éloka-sastra (N O . p . 5 b.

3 T he firs t hal f o f the verses agrees w ith the verse in the comment aryon S K . in the Chinese trans la t ion (N o . p . 89b, a nd in the

Gauda -pdda -bhd sya ,v . 6 1 .

4 V ol . ii, p . A lmos t the same st a t emen t is found in P ingala’

s

comment ary , p . 4 4b f .,and V asu

’

s commen t ary , p . 47a . Cf . Sa ta -s’

d stra

va ipulya ,by Deva (N o . pp . 495 —5 0a . V . S . 2 , 2 , 6 , runs , apa ra smiun

ap aram yugapa t ciram keip ram iti kd la lihgdui, 5 , 2 , 26 , kd ra ueua kd ta h ,

and 7, l , 25 , c ra pe kd la h . A s t o t h is sort o f reason ing see no tes on

O h . i, 2 , 1—4 , 5

—7 , oh . i, 3 , 12.

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

4 8 V A I S E S I K A PHI LOSOPHY

a nd clos ing of the eyes) , l i fe , ( the mot i on s of) m ind , pa i n ,

pleasure,des i re

,

‘

a vers ion,and effort

,etc . , are the ma rks

o f sel f ( VS . 3,2

,To whom do they belong

,i f there is

no s el f A s se l f is t oo subtl e to be perce i ved by th e

fi v e sense-organ s,its exi stence is in ferred from the marks

I n other pa ssages refuting the etern i ty of se l f , he says

tha t,

“ i f se l f be et erna l,there i s no sin in ki l l ing others

,

because s el f cannot be k i l l ed even when th e body i s k i l l ed

( cf . N S . 3,1,

He a l so s tates th e d i fferent opin ion s wh ich assert tha t

there are tw o kinds of sel f et erna l and non -et erna l,or

subt l e and eterna l ( i.e . inact I ve ) and a ct i v e,and that s el f

is n e i ther eterna l nor non-eterna l .3 Then fol low the

d istinct i on s of vari ous Op in i on s wi th regard to sel f and

the world ,which are s im i lar to the d i stinct i ons in the

Brahma —j d ld -su tta .

4 First,the S amkhya i s ful ly sta ted ,

aft er wh ich we read :“ N ext

,another says

,the world

p

i s,a t the beginn ing

, p roduced from a tom s .° A tom s areA .

e t erna l,indest ruct i ble

,and uncon sumabl e

,because they

a re subt l e ( V S . 4 ,1,1 ; 7

,1, S uch a tom s are

c aused to aggregat e with one another by the force o f

m er i t and dem eri t (dharmu and udha frma

,i.e . a d frs ta, in

V S . 6 ,2,1 3) and form bod ies ( cf . 5 ,

2,

Hea v en

1 V ol . x x i i i , p. T he same proo f o f sel f is found in P inga la s

c ommen tary , p . Y asu’

s c ommentary , p . 396 ; Bhava-vivek a ’

s

I’m j fid -d ip a -éd stra ,

p . 1 10b ; M ahayana-tdla -ra tua (No .

p . 6 5 a ; L aksaminusd ra -fid stra (N o . 1280, see be low ) , pp . 79b—80a .

C f . D harma-pala ’

s Va ipulya-Sa ta -éd stra -vydkhyd (No . p . 79a .

B ud dhi is enumera ted as an a t tribut e o f se l f in t he first and t he las tt w o works . S e e not es on oh . i , 2 , 8 . V S . 3 , 2 , 4 , runs , prahm«pd im

-nimesa -unmega -j ivana emanoga tic indriydntara vikdrdh sukha -d uhkha

imha-d ve m-praya tnds'

ca-d tmano liftgdm’

.

2 V ol . x ii, p . 80a .

V o l . lx x , p . 4 8a .

1 T he d iv isions occas iona l ly oc cur in his and Deva ’

s work s . T he

s ix ty-t w o sort s o f d a te? are a lways used in Buddh is t work s . Cf . D aéa

bhz’

tmi-vibhdsd -éd stra ,vo l . v i ii , p. P ingala

’

s commen tary , pp. 38b, 5 5 a .

5 Cf . vol . xcx i, p. 62b P irigala’

s comment ary,p . 23a ; Wal lese r, p. l .

XI I . THE S UT R A ; DATE : 4 . N A GA R JUNA 4 9

and hel l , etc . , ha v ing been produced , not by father and

m other ( i.e . the world i s not produced by other causes ,but i t i s an aggrega t ion of atom s) , are d i sse vered a fter

the force of mer i t and dem er it has been exhausted .

” 1

Nagarj una ,in many passages of h is work s ,2 refutes

' the

A sa t-kd rya-va

’

da , but h is re futa t ion of the theory i s not

rest ricted to the V a iéesik a,because there were some

Buddh ists who advoca ted th i s th eory . E ven in V S . the

theory i s not so ful ly d i scussed as i s th e S a t-lcd rya -vd du

in S K . ( v .

A s rega rds ether Nagarjuna’

s Madhyamika

s’

c‘

istra 3 den ies i ts rea l ity . But in the text ether i s one of

the s i x e l em en ts “ (dhd tu ) , wh ich are not k now n to the

V a iéesik a . P inga la expla in s tha t ether i s the un i v ersa l

vacuum , where the four e l ements are conta ined . Th is

concept of ether i s the same as in V .S .

5 I n another passage

Nagarj una sta tes :“ S om e , both heretics and Buddh ists

,

ack nowledge eterna l th ings. S ome of th e eterna l th ings

are common to both,but others are not common . The

former are ether and N irvana,etc wh i le the la tter are

sel f,t im e

,space

,a toms

,and I t w i l l be se en

t ha t th i s pa ssage refers to the V aiéesik a and the sar‘

nk hya .

Nagarj una did,not refute the V aiéesik a theory of

a ttributes so thoroughly . as in the case o f subs tances .

O n ly one pa ssage has been found in the Mahd -praj fi d

param ita-s‘d s tra

,where he re futes the rea l i ty of number

1 Cf . vol . x ii, p . 79a vol . x xxvi , p . 89b vol . lxxxix , p . 5 3a—b.

’ Thesepassages somet imes refer t o the a t om ic t heory o f the S arvas t i-vada , and

no t always t o the V a ises ik a .

2e . g. Mad hyamika-éds tm , pp. 27b, 4 5 a. f . D vdda éa -d vdm -ad stra

(No . p . 68a and o thers .

3 pp . 28a—b.

4 P rthivi,ap ,

tej a s , vdyu ,ahdad

,and mj fid na . T he s ix elements are an

import ant fac tor in the S hin-gon-shfi ( the Man tra sec t ) .5 S ee note s on ch . i, 2 , 5 -7, and Jac ob i ’s men t ion of the a tom ic t heory

o f the Ja inas quoted above .

11 M ahd-praj fid -pd ramitd-édstra ,vol. xv

,p . g8a P inga la

’

s commentary ,p . 27a , and V asu

’

s commentary , p .

5 0 V A I S E S IK A PH ILO SOPHY

and ind i v i dua l i ty (sum/chyd and p jrthaktva ) .1 I f the

passage i s compared w i th the para l l e l pa ssage in De va ’

s

work and Ya su’

s comm en ta ry , the re futa t i on i s seen to

ha v e been di rected aga in st the V a iée sik a .

2

The abo v e quota tion s m ight poss i bly seem to fa vour'

the

suppositi on tha t V S . had been composed before the t ime

o f Nagarj una ,that i s to say , w as composed about

55 0— 1 5 0 A .D .,though som e of h i s r eferen ces (e .g . to Space )

a re not correct ly stat ed . But,in fact , th i s in correctness or

the de v iat ion from the origina l i s,in th i s case , of such

a kind a s to show tha t the author had on ce had the

o rigina l satra in h i s hands or known about it . Tha t

the quotati on s are no t suffic i en t in number i s perhaps no

Obj ec t i on,because they con ta in the proofs of sel f

,space

,

t ime,a tom s

,etc .

,w h i ch are pecu l ia r to V S . We sha l l

n ex t con sul t the w orks of Deva and Hari-varman wi th

a v i ew to support ing the suppos i tion .

5 . De va ,relying upon the las t quoted sta temen t o f

Nagarj una ,refut es the rea l i ty of ether , t im e , space , and

a toms,and quotes the a sserti ons o f the other system .

“ The other Says ,‘ there rea l ly ex ists a substance ether

,

which i s'

e terna l,a ll-per vading

,and does not cons i st of

parts ( V S . 2,1

,28 because e v eryon e bel i e v es it s

exi stence in e v ery pla ce and in e very t im e ’

A nd,

“ the other says,

‘ e th er must ex i st ; it is a l l

per vading and eterna l , because act ion s (karma ) a re

1 V o l . i, p . 14a .

2 Sa tu-éd stra , c . 3 , 4 . I n the Updya-ka u.§a lya-hrdaya

-éd stra (N o . 125 7 .

trans la t ed in 472 it is s t a ted t ha t t he V aiéesika is the sys tem o f the

s ix ca t egories , subst ance , e t c . (pp. S b—Qa ) , and t he s ix c a t egories are

regarded a s a k ind o f princ iple or m et hod of reason ing. T he work referst o Buddhism , F ire-worsh ippers , Gramm arians or M imamsak as , thechoo l o f m ed ic ine , V a iSesikas , S arii k hyas , Y ogas , N irgran thas , te achersw ho m a int a in t ha t everyth ing is one in essence, a nd t eachers w ho

ma in ta in t ha t everyth ing is d i fferent from one ano ther. T he work isa scribed t o Nagarj una , but t h is is very d oub t ful .

3 Sa ta -éd stra , ch . 9 , p . 496. S d tm m eans the tex t o f the work by Devah im se l f . A t the t ime o f Kumara-j iva sz

’

rtm and acistra are not s t ric t lv

d is t inguished from each o ther.

pXI I . THE S UT R A ; D ATE : 5 . DE V A 5 1

poss ible by presuppos ing i t ’

( i.e . w i thout ether the

a ctions th rowing upw a rds, t hrowing dow nwards , going

and com ing can n e v er happen ) ( satra )1

'

( cf. V S . 2,1

,

The re ferences are on ly tw o,but they con ta in the

essen t ia l po in ts .

A s for the other substances Deva sta tes : The oth er

says,

‘ th ere ex i sts the substance t ime,becaus e it has

the marks of be ing eterna l (sa tra ) , ( VS 2,2

, 6‘ Through dependence on a past : t im e ( the future or

present) tim e ex i sts Time ex i sts rea l ly,because

there are d i stincti ons of chara cteri st i cs or effects among

(pa st, presen t , and future ) t im es ‘

Pa st and

future tim e hav e the i r ow n specia l cha ra cteristi c or

effec t d is tinct from each other ( sa trct ) . The last three

propos itions can be understood by referring to V S . 2 ,

2,

“the term t ime i s appl i cable to a cause

,ina smuch

a s i t e xi sts not in eterna l and exi sts in no t eterna l th ings .“ The other says

,

‘ space i s rea l ly exi sten t , because it

has the marks of being eterna l ( s f/Lira ; 2 ,2,1 0

The othe r says,

‘

no, ( the d i fference o f) the eff ec ts o f

spa ce presupposes a whol e un i v erse T he la s t

part has the sam e m ean ing as“ i ts ( space

’

s) d i vers i ty

i s (caused to be conce i ved ) by the d i fferen ce of its

e ffect s .” 3

“ The o th er says , th ere ex i st a tom s , which are,though

no t a ll-pervad ing a nd e te rna l as wel l , yet non-pervad ing

and e terna l,becaus e they ha ve the e ffects (aggrega tes ) a s

th e m arks of the i r ex i stence 4,1,1 We

1 p . T he explana t ion is found in V a sa’

s commen tary .

2 Gough ’

s trans la t ion . T he origina l runs , nityeevabhd vdd anityes u

bhd vd t kcirane kd ldkhyd it i. C f . o , 2 , 26 ; 7, 1 , 26 ; and Ni S . 39—43 .

3 A drya visesena na nd tuam ( V . S .2a , 2 ,

“ N o in the la t ter partis aga ins t Deva ’

s refuta t ion from the V a iéesika . V asu’

s commen tary O I I

the above three passages (et her, t ime , space) agrees t o grea t ex te n twi t h V . S .

1 V asu expla ins t ha t every th ing in the world is sub t le in the s ta teo f cause

,or near t o cause, bu t gross a ccord ing a s it is far from t he

firs t cause . T he aggrega te o f t w o a t oms is the {l i s t effe c t , and O ne

5 2 V A I S E S I K A PH IL OSOPHY

De va ) obj ect that two atom s do not conj o in wi th each

other on a ll the s ides,

1 because the effects (aggregat es ) a renot spheri ca l (p arimand a la ) ( sr

—Lira ; 7, 1 , 20) We obj ect

that a tom s must be non-eterna l , because they are d i v i ded

throughout by ether ( sa tra ; 7 ,1, 9— 1 0 ; 7 , 1 , 20 ; N S . 4

,

2,1 8 ) Further a tom s must be non-eterna l ’) because

they are d ist ingui shed by colour,etc. (sa tra 7, 1

,

1 8

The la st quotati on s suggest to us tha t ether,tim e

,

and space are a ll-pervad ing and eterna l as wel l,di ffering

from a tom s,which agree w i th the three substances in

the qua l i ty of etern ity,but do not agree w ith them

in be ing a ll-per vad ing. A toms are imperceptible, but

t hey are spherica l and have no norma l exten sion “ th i s

is a characteri stic o f the a tom i c theory O f the V a isesik a .

A nd a tom s are in ferred from the i r effects,but they are not

proved by the m ethod of ana lys i s (un a va sthd ) ; thi s i s

a l so a character isti c of V S . The aggregate of two a toms

corresponds to the binary a tom i c compound (dvyanuka )in later V aiéesik a th eori es

,but there i s no suggesti on of th e

theory of the “ terna ry a tom i c compound ( tryau’uka )

A ll the above quotat ion s from the S a ta -édstra ,depend ing

on the statemen t of Nagarjuna ,appea r to be a complement

a tom is the cause. From the aggregates a toms are inferred to ex is t ;at oms are spherica l and eterna l

,because t hey have no cause . T he

explanat ion agrees w ith V S . and the proof of t he existence o f a tom s

is not a k ind o f ana lyt ica l method (a imva sthd ) . S ee notes on Oh . i,

1 , 1—4 .

1 V asu explains t hat if tw o at om s conjoin w it h each other On all the

s ides , the e ff ec ts must be spherica l , but the e ffect s o f tw o a toms are

no t spherica l as seen . I f a t om s can conjo in wi t h each other, t herecanno t be t w o at oms co n junc t . I f t w o at om s are a ccum ula ted , the

eff ec ts have height . Consequen t ly , a toms must have exte ns ion . If so ,

t hey are no t eterna l . A s im ilar re futa t ion is found in S ank ara ’

s Bhdsya.

on BS . 2 , 2 , 1 1 f . A ccord ing to V asu the effe c t o f t w o a toms is

percept ible , whi le one at om is impercept ible. S ee notes on ch . ii, 2 , 1 .

2 pp . 4 7a—b. Cf . Sa ta -s‘

dstra -va ipzdya , Oh . i,p . 4 9a ; ch . iii,

pp . 49b—5 0a .

3 S ee notes on oh . i, 2, 1—4 (eart h to w ind ).

x 11 . THE S UT R A ; DATE : 5 . DE V A 5 3

t o Nagarj una .

1 The supposed date o f V S . may be

supported by these quota t i on s .

I n th e refutat ion of sel f De va quotes the a ssertions

of the other system and cr it ic izes them . We extract h i s

ow n statemen t O f th ese a l so w ithout comm en tary .

S el f rea l ly ex ists , because i t has the in ferent ia l mark s

(N S . 1 , 1 , 10 ; 23 ; V S . 3 ,1

,1 9 ; 3 ,

2,

“ S el f

ex i sts surely,because pa in and plea sure are fe l t

S e l f exi sts,because co lour

,etc . , are pe rce ived ( cf . N S . 3 ,

1,

“ S el f exi sts because the other sense-organ s are

exci ted by the opera tion of one sen se-organ (NS . 3,1,

A nd because the sam e t h ing i s perce ived by both sigh t

and touch (N S . 3 ,1,

There ex i sts a self,becaus e

the m emory of ex i stence in a pre v ious l i fe i s con tinuous ,so tha t grie f and j oy a ri se even in a new -born baby

(N S . 3 , 1 , S e l f must ex ist,because what i s seen

by the l eft eye is recogn ized by the right (N S . 3,1,

A ccord ing to the commen tary of V a su th e other systems

refuted in the work are the samk hya ,the V a iSesik a

,and

the Ja ina .

”1 Deva n ever m en t ion s the name Nyaya or

1 T he quotat ions are t aken from ch . ix of the Sa ta-sastra . Thischapter is ca l led R ef uta tz

’

on of E terna l Things , which are et her, space ,t ime, a t oms , and N irvana (o f ot her systems t han t he Buddh ist ) . S el fis d iscussed espec ia l ly in ch . 2 , Refi t ta tion of S elf , wh ich con t a ins therefut a t ion o f the samk hya and the V a iéesik a .

2 Next come : N o , because se l f has no touch , l ike et her, and

L ike the owner of a house , sel f suff ers from pa in T he firs t is theanswer to D eva ’

s refutat ion , wh ich says that , if sel f feels pa in w hent he body is k il led , sel f a lso mus t be k i l led . T he second means t ha t , as ,when a house is on fire , the owner suffers from loss , in l ik e manner sel fsuffers when the body is k i lled ,

but se l f it self cannot be k il led l ike theowner. These opinions may be compared w ith N S . 3 , l , 4 .

3 Ch . ii, pp . 40b—4 1b. A very s imi lar s ta temen t is found in P ingala’

s

commen tary , pp . 5 6b—5 7a . Cf . Sa ta-s’

astra-va ipulya ,p . 49a—b. N S . 3 ,

runs :“ indriyan tara

-vikarat”; 3 , l , 1 ,

“ d arsana-sparéanabhyamekartha-grahanat

”3, l , 19, pI

‘

I rvabhyasta-smrty

-anubandhaj jat asya

harsa-bhaya-SO ka-samprat ipat teh and 3,1 , 7,

“savyad rs tasya

-itarena

1 V asu says , “the fo l lowers o f Kapi la rec i te S . S . ,

the fo l lowers o f

Ul I‘

I ka rec i te V . S . , and the fol lowers of Rsabha rec i te the N irgranthasz

'

ttra (p.

5 4 V A I S E S I K A PHILOSOPHY

N aiyayik a in any works of his ; but the abo ve quotations

cannot be found in the V S . they exact ly agree w i th the

NS . I t is cur ious enough to not i ce tha t De va h imsel f

used the Nyaya theor i es in st ead of the V a iéesik a in

regard to so importan t a doct rin e as th e exi sten ce of

s el f,wh i l e V asu . commen t ing on the sam e work ,

used th e

V aiéesik a th eor i es , wh ich were a lso handled by Nagarj una .

I t i s th erefore c lea r that De va cons idered the Nyaya

theori es as being a l so V aiéesik a . I n other passages a l so

D e va con fused the Nyaya theor i es wi th the V ais’

esik a,

e .g . the theory tha t the eyes ha v e a kind of l igh t whi ch

goes out to Obj ects , when we perce i ve them ,and makes

t l‘I‘em perceptible ,1 and the theory o f the rela tion be tween

a who l e and its parts .2 Con sequen t ly ,the Nyaya system

w as no t rega rded a s d is t inct from the V a iéesik a,i f indeed

t he former had been systema t i zed or N S . had been

composed .

3

1 N'

S’. 3 , 1 , 32

—4 . Sata -sas tra , p . 44a ; Sa ta -éds tra -va ip ulya ,p . 5 0b.

2 N S . 2 , 1 , 3 1-4 ; 4 , 2 , 4

- 17 ; Sa ta -édstra ,p . 42a .

3 N os . 125 4 , 125 9 , and 1260 (a l l were t rans la ted in 5 08-35 A . D . ) are

ascribed t o Deva , but it is d oubt ful whe t her t hey are rea lly Deva’

s work s .

N O . 125 9 re futes the four sys tems , wh ich ma in ta in t ha t se l f and c ogn it iona re one and the same t h ing (the S amk hya ) , t ha t t hey are someth ingd i fferent f rom ~

each o t her ( the V a iéesik a ) , t ha t t hey a re e it her t he same

o r d ifferent ( the N irg ran tha ) , and t ha t t hey are ne i ther the sam e nor

d ifferen t ( the J iiat iput ra ) . Th is c las s ifica t ion o f t he four sys t ems is

fo l lowed by sara-ma t i ’s M a hd -yd na-pra veéa

-édstra (No . 1243 , p . 65 a ) , byD harma-pala ’

s Va ipulya-éa ta -sas tra -vyd khyd (a comment ary on N o . 1 189 ,

p . 1 16a , a l it t le d iff eren t ) , and V zj fiap t i-md tra td -siddhi-éds tra ,p . 3b.

T he firs t and the second o f t he four sys t em s are a lso se t forth in the

S a ta -édstm , chs . 3 , 4 . N o . 125 4 has the firs t t w o o f t he four sys tems in

a part o f t he commentary by an unk nown writer. D eva ’

s te xt cons is t so f one hundred syllables ( the work is ca l led the Sa tdksa ra-Sd stra ) , a ndcon tains a d escript ion o f the firs t t w o o f t he four sys t em s . N O . 1260

s t a tes t he t w en t y d i ff eren t o pin ions c oncern ing N irvana . T he seven this the opin ion o f t he V a iéesik a . I t runs , T he V aiéesika ma in t a ins t ha ta t oms and so on (here the te x t is corrupt ed ) a re etern al and prod uce al lt h ings in the world ,

in te ll igen t and un in te l l igen t,by c ombina t ion .

T he firs t process o f comb ina t ion is t he combinat ion o f tw o a t oms and so

o n . W i thou t a t om s and so on t here is no comb ina t ion o f the m. If t hereis no c ombinat ion , t hey e x is t d ispersed . T he d ispersed exist ence o f

a toms and so on is N irvana . Consequen t ly the V a iéesik a savs that ( thek nowledge of ) a toms and their qua l it ies lead s to N irvana .

”

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

0 6 V A I S E S I K A PH ILOSOPHY

We ha v e here,for the first tim e

,a m en t ion of the

s i x categori es 1 Though Nagarj una and De va knew

the six‘

cat egories , they d id not n am e them s ide by side .

Importance a ttaches to the reference to the s i xteen

t op ics of th e Nyaya . The s ixteen top ics are not

expla in ed in the work,nor does the nam e Nyaya occur

aga in throughout th e work . But i t is ev iden t tha t th e

Nyaya had been systematized before Har i -varman .

Ha r i-varman a l so con fused the Nyaya theori es wi th the

V aisesik a ,and d id not rega rd the Nyaya as a system

independent of the V a ise sik a .

Har i -varman further says , “ S om e tea chers ( th e

S amkhya ) main ta in tha t colour , etc. , are noth ing but

e lem ent s (mahd bha ta ) , whi l e other teachers ( the

V aise sik a ) con tend tha t e l em en ts are something d ifferen t

from colour,etc .” 2 T he stat em en t corresponds to the

characteri sti c of the V a isesik a tha t substan ces are

dist ingu ished from a ttributes and a ction s .3 “ A ccord ing

to the V aisesik a the four e l em ents are som et imes

I) . T he subst itut ion o f N yaya. f or N a-ya-hsiu-mo d epends upon the

fac t t hat the s ix te en t opics seem t o be those o f the N yaya , and t he

M adhydntd nugama sastra men t ions the name in the pas sage where logica lt heories are d iscussed ,

and ascribes the nam e t o fo l lowers of a sys tem o f

logic . Ci t san in his commen t ary on t he S a ta -s’

d stra says t ha t the

Mahesvara ( deva ) schoo l has the s ixt e en t op ic s of logica l theory . H is

e numera t ion o f the s ixteen t opics e xac t ly agrees w i th N . S . Bu t he

id ent ifies N aya-bez

'

ame wi t h the N irgranthas . H e a lso enumerat es t hes ixteen princ iples of the N irgran thas , wh ich d o not a t a ll agree w it hN . S . (D a inihon-zoku bk . 5 , p . 385 b) . T he M a dhydntdnugama

s‘

d sh a a lso assert s t ha t the M ahesvara schoo l is connec ted w i t h logic .

V . S . ack nowled ge s I svara (4 , 1 , 19 21 ) and fo llowers o f the Nyaya havea 1 e lat i0 n t o Sa ivism , so t ha t the Nyaya and Sa ivism were some t ime s

c onfused w i t h each o ther. S ee Bhandark ar, Va isna vism and S a ivism ,

p . 1 17 ; N ydya-vd rttika ,p . 466 (c f . M dndz

’

ckya-kd rikd , 1 , 9 ; Brahma

az’

ztra ,2 , l ,

1 T he men t ion of the six cat egories occurs once m ore on p . 68a .

2 Ch . xxxviii,p . 2 1b. T he A sa t-kdrya

-vdda is d iscussed in ch . c li,

pp . 78b—79a .

3 Th is charac teris t ic is refuted by the author in ch . c xl iv , pp. 76-77a .

T he author’s s tandpoin t is no t a rea l ist ic , bu t a k ind o f id ea l is t ic one .

x 11 . TH E S UT R A ; DATE : 6 . HAR I-V A RMA N 5 7

impercept ibl e,

” 1and “ when th ings are destroyed

,they

pass in to a tom s ” 2 From these passages it i s p la in

tha t the term e lemen t m ean s a tom , and tha t the author

d id not d istingu ish the one from the other ; th i s a ris es

from the fact tha t th e author d id no t , in.

hi s system,

acknowledge an a tom ic theory . I n h i s quotation s the

a tom s are of four sorts .“ The fol lowers of U luk a ma in ta in tha t the touch of

earth i s ne i ther cold nor hot , and th e soft ( touch ) of wind

i s expla in ed as in the ca se of earth ; but the touch of

water is cold and tha t of fire i s hot ( V S . 2 ,2,4

E arth a l on e has the qua l i ty of be ing clianged by bak ing ,

3

and th is i s not the case w ith wa ter,etc . ( 7 , 1 ,

V S . does not m ention tha t th e touch of earth i s n e i ther

cold nor hot ; but i t i s stated in P r. Bh.

5 The . opin ion

tha t cold and hot are inc luded in touch i s not known to

V .S .

6 The referen ce to the theory of pakaj a i s noticeable .

A s for earth , i t i s sa i d : Question ,

‘ The fol lowers of

U li’

i k a contend tha t sm el l is an a ttr ibute belonging to

earth . a l on e ( V S . 2 ,2,

Is th e opin ion a cceptabl e

or not ?’

A n swer,There i s

,in rea l i ty

,no substan ce l ik e

earth ; th is has been expla in ed abo v e . The op in i on is,

there fore , not correct. Besides , th e V a i sesik a ma inta in s

that Wh ite copper , l ead , t in ,gold

,s i l ver , and copper , e t c .

,

are included in fire and posse ss sm el l in th emse l ves .

Consequen tly , sm el l i s not confin ed to earth a l on e 7

Th is is an in t erest ing reference . V S . says tha t the

flu id i ty,through conjunct ion w i th fi re

,of t in ,

l ead , i ron ,

Ch . xxxix , p . 22a .

2 p . 676.

3 L itera l ly “ R ipening change R ipen ing has , a t the same t ime,t he same m ean ing as bak ing like paka in S ansk rt . “ R ipeningchange is paka

-j a .

p . 320 .

5 p . 27.

6 S ee notes on 0 11 . i,2 , 1—4 (eart h to w ind ) .

7 p . 3 1b.

5 8 V A I S E S I K A PHI LOS OPHY

si l ver,and gold ,

is common to them wi th wa t er.1 Flu id i ty

is a natura l a t t r ibute o f water and th e cause of flowing

consequen tly flu i d i ty in t in,etc .

,i s acciden ta l . I n V .S .

t in ,etc .

,are n o t class ified a s fire . P r . E h. d i v i ded flu id i ty

,

for the first t im e , in to t w o sorts,in t rin sic (sd firsiddhikn )

and occa si ona l ( n a im ittika ) . The form er i s th e flu id i ty

o f wa ter and the la t ter i s tha t of earth and wa ter .

3 But

gold,etc .

,are not inc luded under fire .

4 A ccord ing t o la ter

fol lowers of the V ais’

esik a gol d is so cla ss ified ? The origin

of the i r opin ion belongs to a t im e ea rl i er than Har i-varman

Thi s has been expla in ed abo v e refers to ch . xxx v i i i,

where it i s a rgued tha t e l em en t s (ma ILd -bha ta ) are not

rea l, but

i

are on ly nam es,that i s

,there are no el emen t s

independen t of colour , e tc . ; e l em en ts are noth ing but

col our,etc .

7; and it a lso re lates to the fo l lowing

Questi on ,

‘ S ome t eachers ho l d t ha t one s en se-organ

ha s one na ture ( i.e . prakrti , m a ter ia l cause ) . ( e .g. the

ol factory organ con s i st s of ea rth,because ) the cogn i t ion

of sm el l i s produced by reason of the predom inance of

the a t tribute ( smel l in the organ ) and of possess ion o f

sm el l . ( S im i larly wa ter , fire , and wind a re the ma t er ia l

causes of the organs o f ta ste,s i ght

,and touch respec t i v ely

,

because) the cogn i t ion s of tast e , colour , and touch are

produced ( in the organ s,in whi ch ) water fire

,and wind

are predom inan t .8 Is the op in i on correct or not ?’

1 T he orig ina l run s , trapu-sisa ~loha-ra je t a -suvarnanam agn i-san'iyogad d ra va t vam ad bhih S amanvam (2 ,

l,

2 2 and 5,2 , 4 .

3 p . 264 . S ee pp. 28,39 .

5 N yaya-koéa ,

pp . 946 -7 S iddhdnta -mukfld va l i (Benares , p . 25 ;7puskaru on 2 , l , 7.

6 p . 2 l b f .7 T he view of the aut hor is the same as t ha t o f the S amk hya . T he

a u t hor is sa id t o have been a fo l lower o f t he S amkhva be fore he becamea Budd h is t , as st a t ed above .

3 T he passage in t he Ch inese trans la t ion c annot be underst ood l itera l ly .

But it must be und erst ood by re ference t o V . S . 8 , 2 , 5 —6 ,“ bhfiyast vad

gandhava t t vac ca prthivi gandhajfiane prak rt ih t at ha-apas t ejo vayus carasa -rupa-sparsa-av iéesat .

x 11. THE S UT R A : DATE : 6 . HAR I-V A RMA N 5 9

A n swer,It has been an swered before that th e op in ion

is not acceptable . E arth possesses not merely sm el l , but

a lso other a ttr ibutes , so tha t earth i s not th e m a teria l

caus e (of the o l fa ctory organ ) . A nd,a s earth originates

in an aggregat ion o f many el emen ts ( i.e . a tom s , a ccord ing

to the other’s theory ) , there i s no pure earth apart from

wa ter,etc . I f the cogn i t ion of sm el l i s produced ( in the

ol factory organ ) by reason of possess ing sme l l , th e

cogn itions of colour,etc .

,mus t be produced a t the sam e

t im e,becaus e ea rth poss esses th e four a tt ribut es ( i.e . colour

,

tast e,smel l , and Questi on ,

S m el l i s possessed by

earth a lon e,and the ol factory organ i s terren e , so tha t

'

the

olfa ctory organ on ly can perce i ve sme l l .’

A n swer,The

a t tributes o f earth are noth ing but ea r th ; the ol fac tory

organ must perce i v e a ll t lie a t tr ibutes of ea rth . A l so

wa ter a lone possesses cold touch,and fire a l on e possesses

hot touch ; and co l d and heat mus t be perce i v ed by the

tongue and the eyes . But th i s i s no t the ca se . Besides ,

there are in rea l i ty no substan ces . Consequen tly the

sense-organs cannot be establ ished . A nd th e funct ion of

them,i.e . the production o f cogn i t i ons ,

comes from con tact

wi th substances ; but , i f there are no substances,there

is no contac t , nor func tion o f the sen se-organ s . I t i s,

t herefore , imposs ibl e tha t th e s en se-organs should ha ve

d efin i t e ma t eria l causes .’ ” 1

1 p . 26a . p . 25 h S ome teachers ma in t a in t hat ( l ) in t he eyes fire

elemen ts a re pred om inant , because the eyes come from ka r ma ’s , wh ich

possesses a qua l i ty s im i lar t o t he eyes , t ha t is, the eyes a re obta ined

by presen t ing l igh t t o o thers (in the prev ious l i fe ) . (2 ) T he eyes perceiveobjec ts by the he l p o f l igh t , a nd canno t perc e ive a ny t h ing w i thou t l igh t .

There fore t he eyes mus t have predom inance o f the fire-elemen t . (3 ) F irein genera l i l lumina tes obje c t s in a d is t a nt place in l ike ma nner t he eye sperceive co loured objec t s a t a d is tance, because t here is fire in the eyes .

( 4 ) A fter a man has d ied , the eyes return t o the sun ,consequen t ly the

e yes are k nown to have the sun a s t heir essence. ( 5 ) T he eyes perceivec o lour o nly and , as c o lour is posse ssed by fire , t he eyes perceive , a fter a l l ,t heir es sence. I n this w ay ether, eart h , wa ter, and wind are k nown t obe pred om inant in the o ther organs . When a man has d ied , the orga no f hearing returns t o e ther, because t he organ perce ives sound ,

wh ich is

60 V A I S E S I K A P H IL OSOPHY

The quota ti on tel l s us that the V aisesik a i s o f op in i on

tha t ea rth possesses th e four a ttr ibutes , water three , fi re

two,and wind one ; but such earth ,

etc are not a tom s,

because the passage trea ts them as aggregates . Thi s

agrees w ith V .S .

1 But the specia l a ttribute of earth i s

smel l,tha t of wa ter i s cold , and tha t of fire i s hot. Th is

a l so agrees wi th V .S . ,

2 except tha t cold and hea t are touch .

N ot on ly i s the relat ion between th e sense-organ s and the

obj ects expla ined as in V .S .,but a l so the Op in ion that

cogn i tion comes from con tact i s qu i te correct. I n another

passage Hari-varman quotes : “ Cogn ition i s produced by

the con tact O f sel f w ith m ind . S e l f i s eterna l,l ik e sound .

”3

The pa ssage,together wi th the above long quotati on ,

a sserts that sel f i s someth ing d ifferent from cogn i t ion ,and

tha t m ind i s an ind ispensable factor in the psych ic process .

The theory that sound i s eterna l , l ike sel f , i s a wel l-known

dogma of the Mimamsa. The statemen t i s som etime s

con fused even with the Mimamsa.

A s for the perceptibi l i ty of the ca tegories , Har i-varman

says : a certa in teacher ma inta in s that number,exten s ion ,

s ingle ind iv idua l i ty ,

4 conjunction,d isjun ct ion

,agreeable

ness,di sagreeableness

,

5a ction s

,un i versa l i ty , parti cu lar i ty ,

possessed by et her. T he o ther organs are s im ilarly expla ined . T he

conc lusion is t ha t each e lement is predom inan t in the correspond ingorgan .

”S ee N S . 3, 1 , 63 ; l , l , 13 ; 3 , 1 , 70-3 , and no t es on ch . ii, 1 , 6 .

1 2 , 1 , 1—4 .

2 2 , 2 , 2—5 .

3 p. 42a ,pp. 63b, 67b.

4 S ingle ind iv idua l ity is l it era l ly “one (or sameness ) and d ifference

(or separa t eness ) Th is is certa in ly a trans lat ion o f eka -p fl haktva .

5 A greeableness and d isagreeableness are perhaps corrupt ions o f

para tva and apam tva ,and may be replaced by priority and

pos teriority. Ci-t san, evident ly depend ing upon t h is passage, s tate s

t ha t un ity , d ifference , con junc t ion ,d is junc t ion ,

number, e xt ension ,

agreeableness , d isagreeableness— t hese e ight at tribut es reside in the

nine subs tances . But the first tw o (un ity and d i fference ) canno t beind ependent of number and e xt ens ion , or priority and

‘

post eriority ,

so t ha t e igh t m ust be seven . H e furt her says that pa in , pleasure ,avers ion ,

d es ire , foo l ishness , cogn i t ion , eff ort , and n egl igence— thesee ight res ide in se l f and m ind . But fool ishness and cogn it ion (lit .

x i 1 . T H E S UT R A ; D A TE : 6 . HAR I-V A RMA N 6 1

and ( some) substances , a l though not coloured th ings , are

v i sibl e ( V .S . 4 ,1,1 1 ; 8

,1,

“ Number , ext ens i on ,

s ingl e indi v i dua l i ty ,

2 conjunction ,d isjunct ion ,

agreeabl e

n ess,and d isagreeableness 3— these th ings each ha ve rea l i ty .

The satra of the other system m en t i ons tha t a pot i s

someth ing d ifferen t from pot-n ess (gha ta tva ,cf. V .S . 1

,2

,

1 1 and tha t the cogn i ti on of a pot presupposes pot

n ess ( 8 ,1,

4 Colour resid ing in substan ces wh i ch are

large and more than one i s v i s ibl e ( 4 ,1,

Wind i s

inv i s ibl e ( 2, 1 ,When the above passage i s compared wi th the statemen ts

that th e four el em en ts are som et im es impercept ibl e”

,and

“ when th ings are destroyed , th ey pa ss in to a tom s ”

,i t i s

seen tha t a ll a toms are imperceptibl e , wh i le substan ces a s

aggregates are percept ibl e upon cond i t ion of be ing large

(maha t) and more than one (an eka -d fra vya ) ; but w ind

i s an exception . These and other po in t s are in agree

m en t w ith V .S .

P erceptibi l i ty of sound i s d i scussed in chapter 1, O n

the P ercep tion of S oun d . The qua l i t ies of sound

a ffi rmed by the other system can be summarized as

fol lows : “ S ound i s an a ttr ibute (guna ) o f ether ( V .S .

2,l,

I t reaches to the organ of hear ing and

causes the cogn i t ion (cf . 2 ,2,

Though sound i s an

a ttr ibute,i ts tran siency i s common to a cti on (karma ) ,

( 2 ,2,

but sound has,l ike other a ttr ibutes , no

action , because i t i s an a ttr i bute ( 7, 1 ,1 5 7 , 2 , 1 2 ;

S ound i s produced by conjunct ion,d isjunct ion

,or

c leverness in Ch inese ) , being c omplemen tary t o each o ther, are a

trans la t ion o f buddhi, and eff ort ( lit . d i l igence ) and negl igence are

a lso a translat ion of p raya tna , so t hat eigh t mus t be s ix . T he

number o f a t tribute s in Ci-t san’

s c ommentary is seventeen (D a im'

hon

zoka-zokyo, 73, bk . 5 , pp. 385 a ) .1 p . 30b.

2 S ee n . 4 on the last page.3 S ee n . 5 on the la st page .

‘1 p. 44b.

5 p . 77a .

6 2 V A I S E S I K A PH I LOSOPHY

another sound ( 2,2, S ound i s momenta ry

as a ct ions are,

and con tinuous These

qua l i t i es a lmost agree wi th V . S . But the qua l i ti es o f

being momentary , l ike a ctions,and continuous

,a re not

m entioned in V S . Thi s is a na tura l consequence o f the

qua l i t i es of sound sta ted in V S . and these tw o qua l i t i es

were accept ed for the firs t t ime by P r . BIL ? Con tinu i ty

i s a l so a ccep ted by N S . ( 2 ,2

,but momen tar iness is

rej ected (3 ,2

,1 1 I f we compare the passage wi th

“ O thers say ,

‘ Y ou con tend tha t the cogn i t i on of colour

i s produced wi thout contact of the eyes wi th coloured

obj ect s . This i s imp oss ibl e , because the ey es ha v e l igh t ,and the l igh t goes out to con tact w i th the co l our (o fthe obj ects) , and then the cogn i tion i s produced

,

’ ” 3 the

passages are s een to con ta in Nyaya theori es . The la tter

is e v iden tly the Nyaya theory .

4 O ther theori es s im i lar

to the Nyaya are found a lso in chapter cxx ix, O n

Doubt,wh ich may be compa red with N S . 1

,1,23 ;

its Bliasya ,a nd 2

,1,37 .

The m ost importan t referen ce i s the fol low ing :

I n substan ces wh i ch ha v e no (d i st inct ) a ttr i butes the

a t tribute is produced by conjunct ion with fi re,tha t is

,

t he orig ina l black colour i s des troyed and the red colour

produced .

Thi s refers to the theory of pakaj a . The V a isesik a

theory o f pakaj a i s d i fferen t from the Nyaya theory .

The form er i s ca ll ed the P i ln -paka

-vd da,wh i l e the

la t ter is nam ed the P itha ra -paka

—vdda .

“ A s s ta ted

abo v e,Ha r i - varman knew the V a isesik a theory of

pakaj a ; but th i s reference i s more s im i lar to the Nyaya1 p . 28a f . , and chs . xl ix , lvi.pp . 287—8.

0 p . 2811.

4 A T S . 3 , 1 , 30-5 0 .

5 p .

6 P r . E h . ,pp. 106—7. S ee not e s on ch . ii

,2 , 2 : Upa skd ra on 7, l , 6 ;

V ioO

rtz'

(S d strcirtha -samgra ha ,A pp. in Bibl . p . 4 66 ; N

'

ydyw kos'

a,

p. 4 5 5 f. Cowell , S arva -da rs’

ana -samgraha , pp. 1 5 4—5 .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

64 V A I S E S I K A PH ILOSOPHY

he,being super ior to the possessor , can a ton e for his

'deed by con fess ion or som e other m ean s . I n the case

o f an equa l su i c ide and ki l l ing the other ha v e the sam e

degree of s in fuln ess ( 6 ,1,

because th e sin i s so

gra ve tha t i t i s d i fficul t to d i spe l i t . I n th e case of

a superior su i c ide i s to be comm i tted ( 6 , 1 , because

the sin ,i f one ki l l s the possessor , cannot be a ton ed for .

I n l i ke manner p lunder and murder must be d iscr im inat ed1

These perm i ss i on s are one of the characteri stics o f

the V ais’ esik a,wh ich s eems to be a surv i va l of the

A /criya-vada , as stated above . That Ha r i-varman ca l l s

the satra a sntra of the Brahmanas,or a Brahman i ca l

set tra ,may show tha t the V aisesik a had been a cknowledged

a s a Brahman i ca l system .

7. The preced ing long extracts from the works o f

Nagarj una ,Deva , and Har i-varman agree with V .S . so

wel l tha t the date of the sntra can be a ssigned to a

t ime l i ttl e ea rl i er than the three great Buddh ists . We

are perhaps qu i te safe in concluding that V S . had been

composed before Har i-varman ; otherw ise the fact of so

many pass ages agree ing w ith V .S . can hardly be unders tood .

Besides,Hari-varman

’

s work shows tha t there were many

d ifferen t opin i on s pre va i l ing among fol lowers of the

V a isesik a before h i s t im e , to say noth ing of the fol lower

of the system,who d i sputed wi th him

,as stated in h i s

L if e. O n the other hand,Nagarj una

’

s and Deva’

s works

do not offer e v iden ces wi th respect tothe var ian t opin i on s

of the V aisesika ; they seem to represen t th e doctrines

con ta in ed in V S . Deva’s m en t i on of the fourth and the

fi fth category exactly agrees with V .S .,a s pro v ed la ter on .

The fact i s expla in ed,i f we suppose tha t Nagarj una and

Deva kn ew the sa tra and d id not pay a tten t ion to the

d iff eren t op in ion s, because accord ing to the Ja ina record

1 pp . 47a , b.

p

xu . T H E S UT R A ; DATE : 4 . CONCL US ION . 6 5

there ex i sted d i fferen t op in i on s among the fol lowers of the

V aisesik a .

Jacobi ’s researches into the dat es of the sntra s of the

s ix system s fix the date of V S . a t about 200—5 00 A .D .

,

a nd S ua l i , fol lowing Jacobi’s proof

,pla ces th e da te in

2 5 0—300 A .D .

1 Ja cobi ba ses his proof ma in ly upon the

rela t ion of the entra s to the Buddh i st school s,the Sunya

vada and the V ijfiana-vada . V S . does not directly re la t e

to the Buddhi st school s . Con sequently h e deduces the

date from the da te of NS .

2 But , as sta ted above , V .S .

is quot ed by the author o f N .S .,and such quotat ion s are

found in the work of Nagarj una : and Deva m akes a

compl em en t toi

Nagarj una’

s quotat ion s . There fore,V .S .

would appear to have been composed before Nagarj una .

But the date o f V .S . cannot be ear lier than Roha-gutta

a nd A sva -ghoga , The conclusion i s tha t V S . w as composed

a bout 5 0— 1 5 0 A .D . I f Nagarj una i s not so ea rly as

1 1 3—21 3,th e date of V .S . wi l l be p laced a t a t im e la ter

than 5 0—1 5 0 A .D . A t any rat e th e da te i s earl i er than

Nagarjuna ,and the contents of V .S . do not con trad i ct

th i s suppos i t i on .

’

1 JR A S . 1914 , p . 1091 . S ua l i , I ntroduzione a llo stud io d ella fi losofiaind iana (P avia , 1913 , p .

J A O S . 19 1 1 , pp. 6—7. H e says , T he V . D . is probably as o ld as the

N .D . for V . D . iv,1 , 6 , is tw ic e quo ted by V at syayana , name ly , in his

commen t on N J ) . iii, l , 33 and 69 and V .D . iii, l , 16 , is quo ted by himin his commen t on N

'

.D . ii, 2 , 36 ; and Uddyota-k ara quot es t he V .D .

s evera l t im es s imply as the sfitra or t he sastra , and once calls it s au thorP a rama rsi

, a t i t le accord ed on ly t o anc ient wri ters o f the h ighes taut hority .

”

3 T he samk hya had a lready been systema t ized be fore 300 B .C . ,

a l though the work s o f t he S amkhya are not so early . T he a l lus ion in

V . S . t o the S amkhya is intel ligible from t h is fac t . S . K . is sa id t o havebeen c omposed at the t ime o f V asu-bandhu , because t he aut hor, Iévarakrsna , is t rad it ioned t o have been a c on temporary o f V asu-band hu .

V asu’

s commentary has a not iceable passage T he S amkhya -sfl t ra sayst ha t sacrifice is avoidable, because it is connec ted wi th impurity , d ecay ,and excess (p . 39b) . S .K. v . 2 , d rstavad anusravikah so. by av iéuddhi'

k sayat isayayuk tah . T he S aih khya had a work before the S . K . (v . 72 )

see S chrader, D a s S a sgi-tan tram (ZDMG . , vol . l xv i ii , pp . 10 1 f . ,

V A I S E S I K A PH ILOSOPH Y

XIII . V A I S E S I K A DOCTR INES : 1 . GENERAL

We ha ve no w fin i shed our researches in to the da te o f

the V a is’

esi/ca-s fotra . The n ext task i s to s tudy the

h i stor i ca l d e v elopmen t of th e V a ise sik a doctr ines and

h i stori ca l l y to conn ect th e doct rines con ta in ed in the

presen t trea ti se wi th those genera l ly set forth . For

t he former N S . and i ts Bhd sya must be careful ly

exam ined,because they sha re an importan t part in the

hi story O f the V a is’

esik a . The la t er V a ise sik a w a s

a ffected by the Nyaya in i ts logi ca l theor i es,but th e

influence upon i ts other phi losoph ica l theor i es i s no t so

great . O n the other hand , th e Nyaya in troduced theV aisesik a doctrines in to i ts sys tem . Con sequen tly it is

not n ecessary for the presen t ta sk to trace the de v elop

m en t in thi s connex ion . O ur presen t purpose i s to

conn ect our t reati se'

with the Va isesik a doctrines . I ts

relat ion to V .S . and P r . E h . wi l l be stud i ed in the

fol l ow ing notes . Here we sha l l try to co l l ect from

Chin ese t ranslation s some ma teria l s concern ing the fourt h

and the fifth ca tegory .

2 . The d ifferent op in ion s sta ted in Hari-varman’

s work

are partly preserved in P r . Bit . and pa rtly a ccepted bythe Naiyay ik as and the Mimamsak as . These d i fferen t

opin ion s are scarcely conta in ed in our trea ti se . The

most ob v i ous d i vergence from V .S . and P r . E h. i s nu

doubtedly the t en ca tegori es . A mong these t en the

fourth (un i versa l i ty) a nd the fi fth (parti culari ty) are

i nteresting from the h i stori ca l po in t o f v i ew .

I n De va ’s S a ta —sastra and V asu’

s commen tary on it

the categori es are s i x in number . I n the work i tsel f thes i xth cat egory ( inherence) is no t cl early descri bed . But

P rofe ssor Garbe , S dmkhya-P hilosophie (pp . 5 7—60, 32 P aficaé ikha .

Festgruss a n R . van R oth (p . T he we l l-k nown eight c auses o f

im perc ept ibi l ity (S .K . v . 7) are found in'

agarj una’

s D uadaso-d od ra

é dstra (0 11 . ii, p. 67b) , S a tya-sidd hi-sastra (ch . xlvii , p . more thaneight ) .

x I I I . V A I S E SI K A DOCTR INE S : 2 . T H E CATEGOR I E S 67

Bhava-v i veka,an em in en t fol lower of h i s

,

1 sta tes tha t

Deva had d isproved tha t category .

T he explana tion of un i versa l i ty and parti cula r i ty in

the S a ta -s’

astra agrees wi th V .S . Un i v ersa l i ty includes

ex i sten ce (sa tta) on the one hand and pot-n ess (gha ta tva )on th e other hand . E xistence is eterna l and has rea l ity

apa rt from the th ings in wh ich i t resides . I n another

respect a l so pot-n ess i s included in pa rti cular i ty . Con

sequen tly,un i versa l i ty and particu lar i ty are rela t i v e

,l ik e

fa ther and son ,the la tter a l so be ing fa th er of h i s ow n son .

Un i versa l i ty i s poss ibl e by dependen ce on particu lar ity '

w ithout part icula r i ty un i versa l i ty cannot be establ i shed .

From the explanation of pot-ness w e ga ther tha t substance

n ess (dra rya tva ) , a ttr ibute-n ess (guna te d ) , and a cti on-n ess

(ka rma tva ) , are sim i larly expla ined,

and are e i ther

un iversa l i ty or parti cu la r i ty . T he u l t ima te particulars

(an tya—vis‘

esa ) are not a l luded to but,i f we compa re the

explana t ion of pot-ness w i th tha t of a toms,th e la tte r

wou ld appear to ha v e been so named .

3 There are no

such subd iv i s ion s o f un i v ersa l i ty and pa rticulari ty as

stated in the Ja ina record and in P r . E h.

E ven in Ha ri-varman’

s work there i s no trace o f

d i fferen t Op in ions concern ing un i versa l i ty and particular i ty .

The w orks o f A sang’

a and h i s brother V a su-bandhu supply

no mater ia l on th i s po in t. Dig-naga ’s H eta -vidya-n yaya

doara -s‘

astra 4 sta tes a s fo l l ows : “ The percepti on s o f

( subs tances) , pot , etc (a ttr ibutes) , number , etc ., ( a ction s) ,

throw ing upw ards,e tc .

, (un i versa l i ty ) , ex i stence , and

( parti cular i ty ) , pot, e tc ., are fa l se perception s (pra tya

because these percept ion s are a l together

conceptua l and m ed iate percepti on s ( savika lpaka

1 Il

’raj fid -d ipa -éd stra ,

p . 1 19a .

2 S a ta-Sd stra , ch . iii,pp. 4 111 ch . iv , pp. 42h—43a ; S a ta -éd stra

ra ipnlya , ch . v i, p. 5 1a .

3 T he u l t ima te part ic ulars are the n ine substances as causes— the foura toms , ether, t ime , space , sel f , and m ind .

4 No . 1293 No . 1224 , p . 3a p . 8a .

68 V A I S E S I K A PHI L OSOPHY

p ra tyaksa ) ,1

and are not immediate (n irvi/ca lpaha

pra tya/csa ) .1 The s i xth category

,inherence

,i s no t

enumera ted in the passage,because inherence i s

imperceptible ; a ccord ingly,the pa ssage shows tha t the

categori es are s ix . I f un i versa l i ty i s confin ed to

exi st ence and excludes pot-ness,particulari ty must

include pot-n ess a s wel l as other sorts of the lower

un i versa l i ty (apara -samanya ,in P r . E h.) But

'

in th e

passage pot i s enumera ted among substances and as

pa rticu lar i ty ,so tha t un i versa l i ty must con ta in both

e x istence and other sorts o f the l ower un i v ersa l i ty .

Universa l ity and particu lar i ty a l so agree in Dig-naga ’

s

work wi th V .S .

Sanka ra-s vam in ,a d isc ipl e of Dig-naga , offers an

importan t tes timony in the course o f i l lust rating,in his

B eta -v idya-n yaya

-pra ve§a

-§astra,

2 contradictory rea sons

1 A s for th ese t erms see no tes on Oh . i, 3 , 12 (cogn i t ion ) .2 pp. 10—1 1a (No . V idya-bhusana , in his H istory of theM ed ieva l

S chool of I nd ia n L ogic (p . ascribes the N yaya -pra veéa t o D ig-naga ,

a nd ident ifies it wi th the N ydya-d vdra -s

‘

astra (N O . 1223 N o .

re ly ing upon a Tibe t an trad it ion . But in Ch ine se the t w o work s are

qu it e d i fferent . N o . 12 16 is c a l led,

accord ing to K w hei-ci’

s transl i terat ion ,

H elu-vidya-nyaya-pra ve.§a t he T ibet an t i t le being

T eka d-ma -rigg-par-hj ug-pahi-ggo ( P ramdna -nydya

-p ra res

'

a -d vd ra ) , wh i leN o . 1223 N O . 1224 is H elu-vidya

-nydya-dvdra T he cont en t s o f

the N yaya-pra veSa as g iven in V idya-bhusana ’

s work exac t ly agree wi tht h is N o . 12 16 , but no t w i t h N o . 1223 1224 . K w hei-c i and o therd isc iples o f Yuan Chwang , . the trans la t or o f t he work s , a ssert t ha tS ank ara-svam in w as a d isc iple o f Dig-naga , a nd N O . 1216 w as composedby t he Bodh i-sa t tva Sank ara-svam in as the Chinese transla t ion assert s .

N O . 1223 1224 , a nd the P ramdna-s'

cislra -p ra ve§a in V idya-bhfi sana ’

s

work (p. 100, sec . wou ld a ppear t o be the same , be cause herem ark s t ha t it w as trans la ted int o Chinese by the Chinese in terpreterT hasan-t san (H hiien-T hsang Y uan Chwang ) , and the Chinese vers ionw as trans la ted in to Tibet an T he T ibet an t i t le is s t a ted t o be

Takad-mahi-hf tan-Qcoarig-pa -la -hj ug-p a (P ramd na -s’

d stra -nyaya

but accord ing t o Cord ier’s Ca ta logue d a Fond s T i'

bé ta in (p. 435 ) the

T ibe t an t i t le s have been in terchanged by V idya-bhfisana , and the

N ydya-pra veéa m us t be t he same work as N o . 12 16 , s inc e Cord ier a t ta ches

t he Ch inese t it le o f the la t ter. Hence the content s o f the N ydya -pra veéamust be t hose o f No. 1216 . There s eems t o be con fusion in V idyabhusana

’

s trea tmen t o f the work s . T he a script ion o f t he N yaya-pro vesa

x 11 ] . V A I S E S IK A DOCTR INES : 2 . THE CATE GOR I ES 69

rega rd ing ex i sten ce on the part of th e V aiéesik a .

I t run s

E xistence is n e ither a substance,nor an a ttribute

,nor

an acti on ;Because of possessing one substance and a ttribute s and

a ct ion s,

L ike un iversa l i ty-parti cular ity .

” 1

I n th i s ca se ex is ten ce i s on ly un i versa l i ty,

and

part iculari ty i s ca l l ed un i v ersa l i ty-particu lar i ty ( Samanga

v is’

esa ) . Un iversa l i ty -parti cu la ri ty can n ever be tw o

ca tegori es,o therw i se the rea son ing i s a k ind of petite?»

pmn czpu .

Dharma-pala,in h i s V ’

Lj fi ap ti-matra ta-siddhi

and V a ipu lya-éa ta -sastra -vyalchya,

3 men tion s the fourth

and th e fi fth ca tegory . The V a is’

e sik a in these works

holds the doctrin es of the s i x cat egori es,

“

you advoca t e

the s i x categor i es .” 4 A nd the s ix cat egor ies are substan ce ,a ttribute , a ct ion

,exi sten ce (un i v ersa l i ty) , un i v ersa l i ty

parti cula rity, and inherence .

5 I n many passages 6 he

re futes the rea l i ty of the s i x ca t egor ies . Hi s a ccoun ts

o f the fourth and th e fi fth ca tegory are summarized a s

fol l ow s

t o D ig-naga is no t correc t . V idya-bhfi sana trans la tes the passag i

t hus S amanya (genera l i ty ) is nei t her substance, qua l i ty , nor a ct ion .

Because it depend s upon one subs t ance and possesses qua l i ty and

a c t ion (p. 95 ) A c cord ing to the Ch inese trans la t ion t here is the

e xam ple “ l ike sdmd ng/a-vié esa W it hou t the exam ple the i l lustrat ion

can hard ly be intel ligible.V . S . 1 , 2 , 8 ,

“ dravya -guna-k arm abhyo’

rthan taram sat ta 2 , 2 ,

23 ,“ek ad ra vya va t tvan na d ravyarii

”; 1

, 2 , 9,“ guna-k armasu c a

bhavan n a karma na guna l i ( 1 , 2 , 7,“sad it i ya to dravya-guna

k armasu sa sat ta‘3 1 197. Bhava-v ivek a , a con temporary o f Dharma-pala (Yua n

Chwang , S i-yu-ci, p . 5 36. Cf . Wa lleser, D er d l lere Vedanta ,p . also

c a l ls t he fi ft h ca tegory srimd nya -visesa (No . 1237, p .

No . 1 198 . N o . 1 198 , p . 1 13a .

5 N o . 1 197, p.

6 No . 1 198 , pp. 76a , 86a ,l 13a ; N o . 1 197, pp . 3a—b, 4a N o . 1 198 .

pp. I OOa—b, I OGa—b

,109a , l l l b, 1 1211 , 1 14a—b, 1 16a ,

1 18a ; N o .

'

1 197.

pp.

70'

V A I S E S 1K A PHIL OS OPHY

Un i versa l i ty i s confined to ex i stence . E x isten ce i s

common to a ll th ings , so t hat i t i s ca l led un iversa l i ty .

1

E xisten ce is som eth ing d ifferen t from substan ces,a ttri butes

,

and so on .

2 I t has rea l i ty and is. percept ible , depending

upon i ts substra tum .

1 Consequen tly,ex i stence i s one

, and

the cause of the cogn i ti ons w ith rega rd to all th ings tha t

they are exi sten t.

Universa lity rparticularity as the fifth category includes

substance-n ess, a ttribute-mess, ac tion-ness , and ea rth-mess ,2

colour-n ess , pot-n ess, cow-n ess (go-tra ) ,3 etc . I t i s a l so

someth ing d iff eren t from the substra ta . Things are

common to one another in one respect, but they are

parti cula r in th e other respect .4 Un iversa l i ty-pa rti cular ity

i s man i fol d 5 and per vades the substra ta . I t i s rea l,

ete rna l,

and perceptibl e . L ike ex i sten ce,un iversa l ity

particular i ty i s th e cause of its cogn i t ion . W'

hether the

ca tegory includes the u l timat e part i culars i s not cl early

s tated ; but i t i s in ferred from the explana tion of a toms

and of the process of the i r combina tion tha t i t does

include them .

I n Roha-gutta ’s op in i on un i versa l i ty w as d i v ided into

three : mahd -Lsdmd nya ,sa ttd -samanga ,

and samanya

vis’

esa -saman ya . These three subdi v i s ion s resol ve them

se l ves,a s a logica l consequence , in to t w o subdi v is i on s ,

the h ighest un i v ersa l i ty (pa ra -saman ya ) , and th e lower

un i versa l i ty (apara -samanya ) , which were accept ed by

P r . E h. A ccord ing to P r . BIL. the h ighest un i v ersa l i ty

is noth ing but ex i sten ce , and the l ower un i versa l i ty

inc lude s a l l sorts of un i v ersa l i ty w i th the except ion o f

ex i st ence and the u l t ima t e pa rt i cu lars , th e la tter of whi ch

are part i culari ty .

6 A nd P rasas ta -pada remarks that

1 N o . 1 198 , pp. l OOa , 1 12a .

2 N o . 1 197, p . 2b.

3 N o. 1 198 , p . l OOa .

p. 1 12a .

5 p . 8 l a .

6 P r. E h.,pp . 1 1—13 , 3 1 1-22 .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

72 V A I S E S I K A PH IL OSOPHY

our treati se , and un iversa l i ty-part i culari ty is established

a s a category d istinct from particula rity .

The la ter V a isesik a,

subsequen t to S ivad itya and

Udayana,

a cknowledged non -exi stence a s a seventh

category . Non-ex i stence i s a ffirmed in V .S . , but i t i s no t

a ca tegory . I f th i s establ i shm en t o f a s even th ca tego ry

can be justi fi ed ,the establ ishment o f the three d i st inct

ca tegori es , un iversa l i ty , un i versa l i ty -pa rt i culari ty,

and

pa rti cularity in the treatise,may a l so cla im to be

justified .

A s for the other categori es (potentia l i ty ,non-poten tia l i ty,

and non-ex istence) , they are no t h i stor ica l developmen ts,

but are d irectly deri ved from the sa tra . Con sequen tly,

they wi l l be treated in the fol lowing not es .

3 . O ur ma in task i s a lmost fin i shed ; but we sha l l

proceed to col l ect some m i sce l lan eous accoun ts of theV aisesik a .

(a ) A sanga wrote many volum inous work s,but he d id

not refer to the V a isesik a as h is predecessors d id . He

d i str ibuted the doctrines of other sys t em s than Buddhi sm

in to s i xteen classes .1 E ven in those cla sses the V aisesik a

i s not c learly ind ica ted .

(6) V a su-bandhu i s a lso a great writer ; but dist inc t

re fe rences by him to the V aise sik a are exiguous . We sha l l

e xtrac t t w o passages from hi s works . I n the K arm a

siddha -p

frakara na i sd stra ?‘ he stat es that,

“ Kanada 3

ma in ta ins tha t a toms conj o in with one another and

produce eff ects (aggrega t es) . The cogn i t i on O f l ength

i s produced by see ing the long side ( of an Obj ec t) , tha t

of shortness i s by see ing the short s ide . The cogn i t ion of1 Y oga

’

cd rya-bhumi-sastra (N O . ch . iii, p . 3 f . P rakarazzdrya

vd cd -sastra -kd rilcd (No . p . 89a ; P rakarand rya-vd cd -éd slra (N O .

ch . ix , pp. 35 a—b. T he firs t is a scribed t o the Bod h i-sat tva M a itreya ,

but it is na t ura l ly by A sanga .

3 No . 1221 N O . 1222 ; p . 9ob 95 a . T he former w as translat ed in

65 1 A .D . and the lat t er in 5 4 1 .

3 I n one of the t w o trans la t ions Kanada is rend ered the sys tem o f )corn-p iece-eater Th is is a lso found in N o . 1 198 , p . 926.

XI I I . DOCTR I NES : 3 . VA R IOUS (b. VA SU-BA NDHU ) 73

square come s from the equa l l ength of the four s ides , and

tha t O f spheri c i ty from th ings gl obula r in a l l th e s ides .

The cogn i t i on o f heigh t is produced from the conv ex form,

and that O f lown ess from th e con ca v e form . The cogn i tion

O f fla tn ess comes from the e ven surfa ce O f th ings , and

tha t O f un e v enness com es from the j agged sur fa ce . When

th ings possessing va ri ous co l ours are rotat ing , th e cogn i tion

of va ri egated co lour i s produced .

”

V .S .,P r . E h .

,and our

trea t i se m ent i on sma l l (amt ) , large (maha t) , short (kra ss a ) ,long (d irgha ) , and spher i ca l but th i s

pa ssage e xpla ins them in de ta i l . A mong fol lowers of

the V aiSesik a these explana t i on s were probably adopted,

because they appea r to be quite na tura l .

I n th e Bu ddha -gotra -s‘

astra l V a su-bandhu refut es th e

rea l i sm O f the V a is‘

e sik a in respect to sound . He says tha t

th e V a ise s ik a ma in ta in s tha t sound i s O f three sorts

sound destroyed by the eff ect,sound destroyed by the

caus e , and sound destroyed by both Thes e qua l iti es o f

sound correspond to the theory O f mom en tar iness of soundin the S a tya

-siddh i-sas tra and P r . E h. But th ey a re ,

for the first t im e , d i st inctly m ent ion ed in our trea t i se .

V a su-bandhu a l so men tions tha t,

sound as an a ttr i but e

cannot, a ccord ing to the V a iéesik a ,possess any a ttri but e .

Thi s i s a v ery importan t doctrin e o f th e V a is’

e sik a . V a su,

commen ting on the S a ta -s‘

d stra,says tha t “

sound can ,

a ccord ing to th e V a is’

esik a,

2n e ith er (be ca l l ed grea t nor be

ca l l ed lo w ( sma l l ) The m ean ing i s that grea t ( la rge )and “

sma l l ”,be ing a t tr ibutes

,cannot qua l i fy sound a t a ll .

T he abo v e passages do no t supply importan t materia l s

but they pro v e tha t Some doctrines,wh ich are not found

in V .S . and P r . BIL. and are m e t wi th in our treatise,are

no t o rig ina ted by the author o f the t rea t i se and exi s ted

be fore h i s t im e .

A S to emanc i pa tion (molcsa,apa varga ,

V .S .

N O . 1220 , pp . 76a—b.

2 S a la -éd slra ,p. 4817.

74 V A I S E S IK A PHIL OSOPHY

does not cl early m ent ion it ,1 whi l e F fr . E h. ful ly describes

it .

2 I n th i s ma t ter Ch inese t ransla t ions supply some

mater ia l s .

Deva sta tes in h is Sa ta -éd stra S:

“ The other says,

‘

there i s emancipat i on,wh ich i s eterna l and has n o

d istress E man c ipat i on i s the m en ta l Sta te free

from d istress The V a iSesik a’

s concept o f

eman c ipa t i on seem s to be n egat i v e,

as in the case

o f other system s , a l though the system i s not at a l l

pess im i sti c.‘

V a su remark s in another passage that d i sc i pl es o f

U luka rec i te the V a is‘

es lka-sz‘

l tra,wh ich

, in a passage

rela ting to the ca tegory “a ttr ibute ” , says tha t, when a man

wa shes h i s body ( in the River Ganga) thr i ce a day and

Off ers someth ing to fire , etc . , twice a day , a kind O f good is

produced in,and res ides in

,h imsel f . 5 Ci-tsan expla in s

the passage in h i s commen ta ry : w ash ing on e ’s body is

prepa ratory to the product i on of good,because wash ing

purifies , whi l e Off er ing fire“

,e tc .

,produce good . But such

a k ind of good i s n ot the fina l good and on ly leads to

hea ven .

” 6 Th i s is ca l l ed an exa l ta tion (abhyudaya ) ,7and

i s d i fferen t from the highest good (n ihéfreyasa ) in V .S .

(c) Paramartha ( 4 99— 5 69 A .D .) describes the V aiéesik a

doctrines in the L aksa nanu sara -s’

astra s:

“ A ccord ing to

the V a iée sik a sel f (alman ) has fourteen sorts of mark ,

i.e . the five externa l and the n in e in terna l ( V .S . 3

The former are brea th ing out,brea thing in

,c losing

1 S ee no tes on O h . i, 3 , 23, 24 (meri t and demeri t ) .2 pp . 272 —82.

3ch . ix ,

p .

4 Cf . V . S . 5 , 2 , 15—18 ; 6 , 2 , 10—16 ; Hand t , loc . c it . , p . 13 f .

~

Ch . i, p .

6 D a inihon-zoku-zokyo, 73 , bk . 5 ,p . 385 b.

7 V . S . 6 , 2 , l ; 6 , 2 , 8—9 ; 10 , 2 , 8 ; l , 1 , 2—3.

3 N O . 1280 , pp. 79b—80a . T he work is a scribed t o G una-mat i , a d isc ipleo f V asu-bandhu , but the exta nt work is no t Guna-ma t i’s origina l ,because the cont en t s evident ly c on fute the aut horship o f Guna-ma t i .P aramartha translat ed the origina l work and commented on it (No . 1 5 04 ,

p . 65 b) . T he e xt an t work is one part of his ow n commen tary.

XI I I . DO CTR INE S : 3 . V AR IOUS (c . P A R AM A RT H A ) 7 5

( l i t . w inking) , Open ing ( l i t. see ing) of the eyes , and li fe .

The latter are the fol low ing : The system ma in ta in s tha t

se l f i s eterna l,and m ind (man a s ) i s as regards exten sion

a tom i c ( am t ) (3 ,2

,5 7

,1, but i s a l so eterna l

There are m er it ( cl/l amin a ) and dem eri t (adharma ) apart

from these .1 Mer it i s good and dem erit i s e v i l . They lead

to conta ct O f se l f wi th m ind . N in e th ings are produced

from the con tact . From sel f and m ind com es cogn i tion

( buddhi) , wh ich recogn izes everyth ing. From cogn ition

com e pl ea sure (su lcha ) and pa in (dublcha ) . P l ea sure and

pa in produce des i re ( icchd ) and a vers i on (dvesa ) , i.e . des ire

i s caused by pl ea sure and a vers ion i s by pa in . Desi re and

a vers ion produce effort (praya tn a ) . By effort pa in is

a voided and pl ea sure i s sough t . E ffort produces m eri t

a nd demeri t .1 E terna l i sts (Sd s’

va ta -vadin ) bel i e v ing in

ex i sten ce in a future l i fe practi se a sceti c i sm in the presen t

l i fe ; th is i s m er it ; 2 wh i l e E x termina t iona lists (Uccheda

vadin ) , rej ect ing the future l i fe , do not contro l the i r

m inds and comm i t ev i l ; th i s is dem er i t . Fr‘om meri t

a nd demer i t come s impress i on (samskara bhaf

vana ) .

Impress i on i s the cause wh ich rem inds us of past e vent s

( 9 ,2

, 6 Mer it and demeri t,i.e . a drsta ? rema in a ft er

the presen t m erit and demer i t ha ve gon e away ,and a fter

wa rds combin e w i th sel f and produce a new m er i t and

demer i t , as sta ted abo v e . Mer i t and demeri t,i.e . ad/rsla ,

c ause the fol lowing fi v e act i v i t i es : th e upw a rd flam ing o f

fi re , the s ideward blow ing O f w ind ( 5 ,2

,the fa l l ing

d own and s inking of ea rth and wa ter ( 5 ,1

, 7 ; 5 ,1,1 8 ;

5,2

, th e conjunction ( and d i sjunct i on ) O f a tom s w i th

( and from ) one another ( 5 ,2

,and the con tact o f sel f

w ith m ind ( 5 ,2

, 1 3 ; 5 , 9 ,2

, 6 )“ The tirthaka ma in ta ins tha t there ‘ are two k inds O f

d i ssolut ion of th e world ( samva rta ) , the an tara -samva rla

1

7 ;2 S ee P r. E h. , p . 10, and notes on ch . i, 3 , 29.

-3 (meri t and demeri t ) .

76 V A I S E S I K A PHI LOSOPHY

and the tej aZl -sa fmvarta . The form er has the dura t i on o f

ko l is ( lcol i z ten m i l l i on s ) , tha t i s , three lca lpa s o f

kfit’l S . The first ka lpa O f kolis i s the period

O f a fire-world,the second of a water-world

,and the t hi rd

o f a wind-world . Dur ing th e fi rst lca lpa the world i s

created and d issol v ed , and SO in the second and the th i rd .

A t the t im e of d i ssolution e v ery gross th ing is dissol v ed

in to its componen t a tom s,wh ich exi st wi thout conjunc t ion

with one another throughout the period . A t the t im e

o f creat ion ,m eri t and demeri t , i.e . adrsla , cause the

combina tion O f’

a toms . The combina tion of at om s through,

or wi th ,m eri t brings about s-uga ti , Wh i l e the combina t ion

through , or w ith , dem eri t brings about da rga li. By

combination a tom s grow bigger and bigger and produce

the whol e world . S el f and m ind conj o in wi th,and are

d isj oined from,ea ch o ther , when a tom s do the same .

A fter the three lca lpa s the a n ta ra -samvarta i s o v er,and

there com es the tej ah-samvarta . When three ka lpa s of

the tej ah—safiw afrta ha v e e lapsed

,a ll a toms exi st w ithout

conjunction wi th one another,and sel f and m ind a lso

exist wi thout conjunction . A t that t im e se l f i s in

temporary eman cipa t ion . A fterwards m eri t and dem eri t,

i.e . ad rsta ,cause the conjunction o f s e l f w ith m ind

O ne' who seeks eterna l em an ci pa t ion ought to de vo t e

h im se l f to mora l i ty ( é i la ) , l i bera l i ty (ddma ) , a scetic ism

( tapa s) , a nd yoga .

1 From these four sorts O f pract i ce i s

produced the suprem e m er i t wh ich leads to the a tta inm en t

O f eman cipa t ion or h ea v en . The supreme m eri t brings

about exa l tat ion (a bhyuda ya ) and knowl edge o f t ruth

( ta ttva E xa l ta t ion i s enj oy m en t of pl ea sure in

hea v en . Knowl edge O f truth leads to eterna l emancipat ion

( i.e . n ihs‘reya sa ) , when m er it and dem er i t , i.e . adrsla , ha v e

be en completely dest royed,and sel f and m ind n ever com e

i nto conj unc t i on wi th each other,tha t i s

,w hen the n ine

1 V .S . 6 , 1 , 5—6 , 2 , 9 ; 5 , 2 , 1 5

—18 ; 6 , 2 , 14—16 .

XI I I . DOCTR I NES : 3 . VAR IO US (c. P A R A MA RT H A ) 77

th ings are no more produced . The who l e doctrine se t

forth‘ depends upon the con cepts O f se l f and a toms .”

Thi s sta tem en t agrees gen era l ly w i th V .S .,but it i s not

exact ly the same . The n in e th ings,as th e a ttr i butes o f

sel f,are not cl early sta ted in V .S . F fr. Bh.

1 tr i es,for the

fi rst t im e,to pro v e the n in e th ings to be a ttr ibutes o f se l f .

The proof evid en tl y shows tha t F fr . Bk . i s th e fi rst work

to enumerate the n ine a ttr ibutes o f se l f.2 A nd the theo ry

O f the an ta ra -sa n‘

w a rta and th e tej ah-sa riw arta is a l so

no t found in V .S .,a l though the dogma of t ran sm igra tion

suggests the in troduct ion o f the t heory o f crea ti on and

di ssolut i on in to the sys tem . V .S . does not undertake to

expla in the process of creat ion,etc .

,but i t tr i es to expla in

the constructi on or the sta te O f the world . P r . Bh.

expla ins the proces s O f creat i on ( srsti) and disso lil t ionA s for the w ay to and the m ean s of th e

a t ta inmen t O f emanci pat i on,P r . Bh.

4agrees w ith the above

sta temen t more exa ct ly than does V .S . These three poin ts

prove tha t P aramartha’

s statemen t came from P r . Bh., and

tha t P aramartha i s la ter than P raéasta-pada .

(d ) L a stly ,Dharma-pala i s important . He says : The

V a iéesik a ma in ta ins tha t,i f th e cause s of pl easure and

pa in ha v e been comple tely destroyed ,and a ttachmen t to

th ings ha s been rooted out,Sel f becomes en tirely a l on e

( lceva la ) , free from ( list III 'ban ces,and i s in accordance w ith

i ts rea l nature . S el f in th is sta te i s not a cti v e any more ,but absolutely happy and e t erna l . Thi s i s eman c ipa t ion .

” 5

1 pp. 67—70.

2 p . 10 , gunah rupa rasa gand ha sparsa sa iiikhya parimana

prthak t va samyoga vibhag a para t va apara tva buddh i sukha d uhkha

iccha d vesa praya t naé ca it i k antha uk tah saptada éa ; ca sabdasamuc c itaé ca gurutva

-d ra va t va -sneha -samskara -adrs ta ( i. s . dharma ~

ad harm a )-s’

abdas ca sapta eva ity evan'

I ca turvimsa t i gunah. T he

passage proves t ha t P r . Bk . enumera tes the twen ty-four a t tribu tes fort he firs t t ime a fter the s'

z'

l lra w as composed .

3 pp . 48—9 .

pp . 272—82 .

5 No . 1 198 , p . 79a .

78 V A I S E S IK A PHILOSOPHY

When we compare the pa ssage wi th P r. Bh .,pp . 28 1 — 2

,

we find them both in agreement .

Dharma -pala,from h i s ow n standpoint

,

1 refutes theV aisesik a

’

s concept o f se l f , which'

i s som eth ing d i fferen t

from cogn i t i on,and he enumera tes th e n in e a ttri butes of

sel f,plea sure

,pa in

,desi re

,a v ers ion

,effort

,m eri t

,demeri t

,

impress ion,and cogn i ti on . These a t t r ibut es pervade the

substra tum sel f?

M ind is,a ccord ing to h is sta tem en t , corporea l , and its

ext en s ion i s the sam e a s tha t O f a tom s2(paramam l ) ,

i.e . spheri ca l (parima nda lya ) . V .S . a scri bes the exten sion

of a toms (amt ) to m ind ; but th e sa lon does not use th e

t ermpa ramana , wh ich i s found in P r . Bh. I n th e latter

w ork the t erm a nu i s not the designat i on of a toms , but

one of the fi v e sorts O f ex ten s ion (par ionana ) . I f m ind

i s ca l l ed cum. in the sen se of P r . Bh.

’

s t erm inol ogy,the

ext en sion O f m ind must be th e sam e as tha t of binary

a tom i c compounds (dvya zm ka ) and non -et erna l . 3 The

pa ssage,therefore

,suggests that Dharma-pala knew the

d is t inct ion between p aramana and cum . Con sequently ,

we may conclude‘

tha t the pas sage depends upon P r. BIL.

H e further s ta tes that “ fol lowers O f U luka say that

the sen se-organ s ,th e eyes

,e tc .

,consi st of fire e ther earth

wa ter and wind-substance in order . The eyes percei v e

three substan ces : fire,earth

,and wa ter , and espec ia l ly

colour . The sk in perce i ves four substan ces out of the fi ve ,excepting e ther , and especia l l y touch . The ear perce i v e s

sound,t he nose perce i v es sm el l

,and the t ongue tast e

”

.

4

V .S . does not assert that ether i s the ma teria l cause o f

the ear. O th erwi se ether must be an el em en t ( bhala ) .

But in V .S . ether is the cosm i ca l vacuum . P r . Bh. reckons

ether as one of the fi v e el emen ts,

5and as the ma teria l

1 N O . 1 198 , p .

p . 8 l a .

S ee no te s on ch . i , 3 , 6 (ex tension ) .N o . 1 198 , p . l 09a .

p. 24 .

UV

a.

33

no

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

80 V A—I srs A PH ILOSOPHY

0

etc . But in hot wa ter wa ter h ides th e colour of fire,so

tha t fire , though ex isten t in wat er , cannot be perce i v ed

I n a certa in work (sastra ) O f th e V aiSe sik a som e teachersre fute th is Op ini on and say t hat “ when a whi te cloth

has been dyed w i th blue or other colour,wh i t e cloth is

not perce i ved any more , but it cann ot be contended tha t

the cloth a lso i s no t perce i v ed . When the blue colouris perce i ved

,th e essence 1 O f the blue colour i s a lso

perce i ved . The essen ce of the blue col our i s inheren t

in the c loth,con sequently the cl oth is perce i ved a t the

s am e t ime when the blue colour is perce i ved . I n l ik e

mann er,though th e colour o f fi re i s not perce i v ed

,fire

can be perce i ved , when water i s perce i v ed in con sequence

o f colour,because fire is conjunct w i th wa t er ”

52

The f i rst two Opin ions are found in V .S . as wel l a s in

Bh. ; but th e la tter two can be t raced nei ther in th e

two works nor in our t reati se . From th ese pa ssages we

m ay conclude that t here were many d ifferen t Opin i on s

among the V a iéesik as be fore Dharma-pala . K w h é i-ci’

s

m en tion O f th e e ighteen school s of the system,though

it cannot be accepted a s it stands,i s to som e exten t

t rue . A nd i t i s confirmed by the record of the Ja ina

s ch ism,by the S a tya -siddh

fl -s’

aslra,and by the com

m en taries on V .S . The author o f the trea ti se may no t

be cons idered as the represen ta t i ve of h i s t im e ; but

con tempora ry works , i f any ,are

'

e ither non-ex i st en t or

no t yet d isco v ered , and the trea t i se has a clos e rela t ion

to V .S . and P P . Bh.,so tha t the author plays a sign ifican t

part in the h i story of the V a iSesik a .

XI V . T H E N YAYA : 1 . KNOWN 'ro DEV A ETC .

1 . A few rema rks on the Nyaya m ay be added .

The Nyaya w as not known to K autilya (300 but

the system had been const i tuted be fore Har i-varman

1 B lue-co lour-ness (nila -rz’

cpa-lva ) .

2 No . 1 198, p. 10601 .

X I V . T H E NYA YA : 1 . KNOWN T O DE V A , E TC . 8 1

( c. 260 Not on ly Har i-varman , but a l so De va

re ferred to the Nyaya theor ies . A nd e ven A s’

.va-gbosa

knew the five-m embered (pa fica-avayava ) reason ing , as

shown in wha t fol lows .

I n the S il tralankara he states : “ K auéik a sa id to h i s

friend : ‘ The S amlchya-sa tra ( i.e . the theor ies of th e

S amkhya ) may essentia l ly be summarized in the five

Inembered rea son ing : 1,thesi s (pra t

flj fia) ; 2,rea son

(heta ) ; 3 ,example (udaharana or d jrslan ta ) ; 4

,appl i ca

tion (upanaya ) ; and 5 , conclusion (n igama fna ) .1 But

the S amkhya-sntra cannot supply any example ,because the S amlchya-s i

‘

l tra expla in s tha t p radhana

prakrit) i s not produced by any other th ing ; i t has

an eterna l nature,and produces all th ings ; i t i s uni

v ersally per vad ing (vibhfa ) , and (a t the sam e t im e )pen etrates everywhere 2 ( sarva -ga ta ) . T he explana tion

con ta ins a contrad i ct ion ,because th ere i s in the world

noth ing such as to produce other th ings and n ever to be

produced by anyth ing else . A l so,a th ing wh ich i s uni

versally pervad ing and pen etrates e verywhere i s proved to

ha ve been wrongly conce ived . A n un i versa l ly pervad ing

th ing cannot move anywhere,and a th ing wh ich moves

cannot be un iversa l ly pervad ing ; the concepts are

inconsisten t w ith each other

Jacob i remark s on K aut ilya’

s say ing (S amkhyam Y ogo

L o'

lcaya tam ca -ity anviksiki ) tha t W i r haben j et zt d i e

Gew i sshe it,dass S amkhya und Yoga schon 300 v . Chr .

bestanden,und zwar a ls ph i l osoph ische S ysteme , d i e s ich

auf l ogisch e Bew eissf iihrung stiitzten (anviksiki ) , und

n icht etw a nur in der Form intu i ti ver S pek ula t ion ,

w i e das sogenann te ep ische S amk hya ’

,das nur e ine

1 Huber, in his trans lat ion , ident ifies t hese w i th aa bda , anumd na ,

upamcina, l

’

égal i t é and la cert itude absolue (or w it h pra lyaksa or sa bda ,

a numdna ,upamdna , a rthdpa l tl , and anupalabdhi) , pp . 1 5 —16 . But L un-i

(reason ing ) in Chinese does not mean p ramdaa as he unders tands it .3 This is a l i tera l rendering in the Ch inese translat ion .

3 V ol . i, pp . 72a—73b.

82 V A I S E S I K A PH I LOS OPHY

popu lari s i erende E n ta rtung des e igen tl i chen S amkhyai st I f the S amkhya w as employ ing

i

logical demons trat i on in 300 B .C .

,th e S amkhya o f th e t im e O f A s

’

va-ghosa

may poss ibly ha ve in troduced the five-m embered reason ing

in to th e system .

2 . The essen tial and character istic feature of the Nyayai s the five-membered rea son ing. A ccordingly

,the syste

ma t iza tion of the Nyaya mode of reason ing is ea rl i e r

than the Chri stian era . A s for the origin O f the Nyaya ,

we can trace i t at th e tim e of Maha-V ira and Buddha .

The Ja ina canon s hold that there are four sorts of beta 3

pramana ,mean s of knowl edge ) , wh ich are exa ctly the

sam e as those in th e Nyaya ,and empl oy a prim i t i ve

form of rea son ing.

4 The Brahma -j ala -su l ta tel l s us tha t

t here were many teachers add icted to logic ( ta frkin ) and

reason ing ( fm tmdms i fn ) .5

But argumentat ion na tura lly pre va i l ed among ph i lo

1 Z ar Frzihgeschichle der ind ischen P hilosophie, p” 7389 T he S amk hya system is very logica l , as seen in S .K. S . K .

,

d e fines anumdna “ta l l inga l ingi purvak am . T he defin it ion may

v

be

t ak en t o mean the abstrac t and un iversa l ly va l id re lat ion be tween them idd le ( liftga ) and the ma jor t erm ( lifigin ) , i. e . vydp tz

'

. I f t his is rea l lythe case, the defin it ion favours the supposit ion t hat S . K . ad opt s thet hre e ~membered reason ing , wh ich is more advanced t han t he five

membered and some verses in S . K . rea l ly propound the t hree-memberedreason ing (vv . 9 , 1 5 But acc ord ing t o the Gauda ”pd da bhd sya on

t ha t verse the defin it ion does not a lways represent the un iversa l ly va l idre la t ion ; and

,a lso , acconi ing to K umarila

’

s S loka varl tzka (A numa na

pa riccheda ,v . the V indhya vasins (I évara krsna , t he author o f

S . K . , e tc . ) d id not know the un iversa l vydp ti, but on ly the vydp ti wh ichis va lid in spec ia l cases . A nd the verses in S .K . are nece ssari ly short ,because t hey are in the A rya metre. Bes ides , the commentary on S . K .

in the Ch inese transla t ion and the Gauda -pada bhd sya a lways use the

five-membered reason ing. Consequen t ly the S amk hya is proved t o haveu sed the five-membered reason ing even a t the t ime Of I évara-krsna and

his fo llowers . S uch is the case w it h IVS . as wel l as V . S . T he t hreem embered reason ing w as elabora ted by D ig-naga for the firs t t ime in theh is tory o f Ind ian logic (N O . 1223 N O . 1224 , p. 2b p . 7b) .

3 A s f or t he term hem in t his sense, see be fore. A ccord ing t o Colebrook ethe four sort s of p ramana are acknowledged by t he N yaya on ly .

1 V idya-bhfisana , H istory of theM ed ieva l S cltbol of I nd ia n L ogic , pp .fig—5 .

5 Ib id . , p. 60.

X I V ; T H E NYAYA : 2 . THE S YL L OG I SM 83

sophers ev en in ea rly t imes. A remarkabl e example

i s found in the Brhad-ara nyaka -upan isad ( th e th ird

adhydya ) , and th e Chan dogya -up an isad ( 7 , 1 , 2 ) reckon s

Valcovd lcya (D ia l ogue)1as on e of th e sci en ces a t tha t t im e .

But these cannot be rega rded a s th e direct origin of th e

Nyaya rea son ing.

The establ i shmen t of a kind O f syl logi sti c form seem s to

ha v e been n ecess i tat ed by S afij aya V ela t thi-putta and other

soph ists . Ma lia-vira w as forced to establ i sh the S yad

vada ( S ap ta -bhangi-n aya ) and the N aya s . Buddha had

a spec ia l mode o f an sw ering questi on s .

2 A Ja ina sage,

Bhadra-bahu (d ied 293 elabora ted a syl l ogi sti c form

w ith t en m embers (da s’

a -a vayava Th i s form

appears to foresta l l the five-m embered form of the Nyaya

but another syl logi st i c form w ith t en m embers , wh ich is

set forth by V at syayana ,5 may have preceded the five

membered form . The first five of th e t en m embers are,

as V atsyayana a ss'

erts,superfluous a s m embers of a syllo

gistic form .

I n th e t im es prev I ous to the author of N S . there were

a grea t many soph i sts,as seen from the fifth chapter O f

N .S .,where the twen ty-four k inds O f fut i l i ty (j aw) , and

th e twen ty-two k inds O f un fitn ess to be a rgued with

(n ig’raha-S lhd n a ) are m en tioned . Futi l ity i s a l so m en t ioned

1 L ogic,accord ing t o S amk ara and t o Max M iiller

’

s tran s la t ion .

2 This is ca l led the ca l vari vydka razzdni, v iz. ekd n’

zsa -vydka rana , vibhaj yawydkarazza , pa rip g

-cchd vydkarazza ,

and slhdpa niya vydkam na . S ee

V ibhdsd -sd slra (N O . ch . 7, pp. 23a—b ( the te x t of the L ibrary Of theInd ia O ffice) . A lso the M ahd -praj na-paramita-éd slra often re fers t o it(vol . x xxv , p . 85 11 ,3 Jacobi , Ka lpa -sfilra , p . 1 1 S BE vol . xxn , p . x l ii .4 V idya-bhusana , loc . c it . , pp . 6-7 ; L eumann , ZDMG . , x lvi , p . 649.

T he t en members are p ra lzj fid , p ra lzj fid -ribkakti, helu , helu-vibha kti,

vipa ksa , vipa ksa-pra tisedha , drs lanla ,

(Zéankd ,d éa iikd-prcuisedha , and

m’

gamana .

5 O n N .S . l , l , 32 . They are j zj fid sd , sams‘aya ,sakya -prdp ti, prayoj ana ,

0 0 9 -1

upa na ya and nigama na are exc luded from the syllogist ic form(N O . 1223 N O . 1224 , p . 26 p . 7b) .

V A I S E S I K A PHIL OS OPHY

in the Upd ya Joaus’

a lya-hi

~daya-s

’

astra 1(20 the

Ta 'rka -s

’

d stfr'a 2(22 or 27 kinds) , and Dig-naga ’s H etu

vidya-nydya

-dvd ra -Sd stra 3( 22 k inds) . Unfitness to be

a rgued wi th ”

is a l so m en t ioned in these three works,and

the Tarka-s’

d stfra 4 perfect ly agrees w ith NS . in th i s poin t,

though the explanat i on s somet imes agree w ith,somet imes

d iff er from , those O f V atsyayana . The agreem en t e v idently

shows that the unfitness to be argued wi th ”

in th i s work

w as der i ved from NS .

3 .

’

The date of N S . has been d iscussed by Jacobi and

S ua li, as sta ted above . The former places the date in

200 5 00 A .D .,whi le the latter places i t in 300 3 5 0. The

ba si s wh ich Jacob i took for h is a rgumen t I s the fact that

N S . attack s the theory O f S fInya-vada , but the V ij fianavada i s not a l luded to.

Nagarj una ,d iscuss ing pramdna in h i s V igraha

1 N O . 125 7, trans la ted by K ek aya in 472 A . D .

2 N O . 125 2 , trans la ted by P aramartha in 5 5 0 A . D .

3 N O . 1223 N O . 1224 , trans lated by Yuan Chwang and by I -t s ing .

‘1 Ch . iii, N igra ha-sthdna

,p . 72a . D harma-gupta

,a Buddh is t of

S outhern Ind ia , came t o Ch ina in 5 90 A . D . and d ied in 6 19 A .D . (Nanj io’

s

A pp. II , A ccord ing t o his L if e (N O . 1493 , p . 92b, N O . 1485 , p. 66b)he read the work in S ha-IO (a prov ince of Ch inese Turkes tan ) , when on

t he w ay t o Ch ina . What he read cons isted Of Slok as . But the

ex tant work cons ist s of about 330 slok as . S ome of the Oldest Ca ta logues ,N os . 1604 ,

1609 , men t ion t ha t the book is in 2 vo ls . , bu t the ext ant one isin 1 vol . ‘A nd the beg inn ing Of the work c learly shows tha t it is on lya conc lud ing part of the orig ina l . I t has on ly t hree sec t ions in

a chapter, apparent ly the last , ca l led P arip rcchd , ( 1 ) wrongrefuta t ion ”

, (2 )“true refuta t ion (of j d l i) and (3) nigraha-alkana .

T he work is somet imes ascribed t o V asu-bandhu , but th is is d oubt fu l .P aramartha commen ted on it

,bu t the commen tary (3 vols . ) has been

lost (N O . 1 5 04 , pp . 92a , N O . 1609, p . l l l a , N O . 1483, p. 77b) .

H e a lso trans la ted the N igraha-slhdna-sastra ( 1 the P arip rcchd

sastra ( 1 and the Cah-shw o (or lun td o-li-lun ( 1 and he

wrote a commentary (5 vo ls . ) O n the last , ca l led the E xp lanat ion of the

Ca h-lun . A ll have been los t . Ca h-shw o (or law ) l d o-li l itera l ly meanscorrec t ly ( truly ) expla in ing reason (or wh ich may havebeen the trans lat ion Of N yaya . Yuan Chwang trans la tes N yaya bytrue reason (or reason ing ) (Ga it-Ii) . If so , the Cah-shw o (or law ) td o

li-l im may have been a tran s la t ion Of N S . Tha t the commen tarycons ist ed of 5 .vols . suggest s the five adhyayas Of N S .

X I V . T H E NYAYA : 3 . D ATE OF S UT R A 85

vyd vartan i} says :“ I f a pramd na can establ ish Obj ects

,

the pramana n eed s a l so to be establ i shed by another

p ramana . Wha t sort of pramd na can establ i sh th e

pram d na ? I f (you say tha t) th e pramana i s e stabl i sh ed

wi thout another,your a rgum en t i s incoheren t and defect i v e

,

SO tha t another rea son shoul d be Offered .

2 I f (you say

tha t) the pramdf

na i s compared to the l ight of a lamp,

wh ich i l lum ina tes both i tsel f 3 and other th ings— so tha t

the pramana can establ i sh i tsel f and other Obj ects,your

argum en t i s a m i stake,because the l ight does not i l lum inate

i t sel f l ik e a pot 4 in th e da rk ,and i l lum inating i tsel f i s

incon sist en t w ith i l lum inating other th ings.”

N S . says,pramd na tah siddhehprama

-nan dmpramanaan tara -siddhi-p

fra sa iigah,5 tad -vin ivr tter ca pramana

siddhi-va t Iia l-siddhih,6 'na prad ipa

-prakas

’

a -siddhi-va t

ta t-s iddheh,7 and lcva cit ta n icrtti-dars’

and d an i’vrtti

dars’

a 'nd c ca kva cid an ehdn tah 8 ( 2, 2 ,1 7 I f w e

1 N O . 125 1 , pp. 13b, 18a-b. S ee M ddhyama ka

-vrtti (P ra sanna-pad‘

B ibl . Bud . , N O . pp . 16 , 30, 5 6 69

2 S ee note 6 .

1 A ccord ing t o the commentary “ i tsel f ” means “ ligh t i tse lf4 A ccord ing t o the commen tary , if the ligh t of a lamp can il lum inatei t sel f , the l igh t mus t ex ist as being dark before it has been illum ina t ed .

A po t is d ark in a d ark room , before it has been i l lum inated . Just so inthe case of i llum inat ing i t self. But the light is not dark consequen t lyit cannot i l lum inate i t self.

5 Ba llantyne : S ince it is by P roofs (pramdzza ) t hat the e x iste nce ofP roofs is establ ished , the ex istence of other P roofs present s i t sel f ( for

Ba l lantyne : “ O r in the absence t hereof — i. s . o f P roof ,— s inceP roo f may , in v irtue of i t sel f , be P roof ) , t hen , just as P roof is establ ished( independen t ly) , so may t h is (v iz . righ t knowledge, independen t ly o f

any cause Of it ) be es tabl ished .

”T he transla t or o f the V igraha

vyd va rtanimay have understood s cd pramdna-siddhi-m l as -vd -a -pramdna

siddhi-va l .7 Ba l lantyne :

“ I t is not so — t hat an end less series of P roo fs o f

P roo fs are requ ired because it (viz. P roof ) really is , just as the l igh tOf a lum p is .

”

8 This la st 5mm is not reckoned as a 8mm by the ed i tor o f the

IV ydya-bhdsya (B ibl . I nd . ) or by the N ydya

-sfl tra -vrtti o f V iéva-natha ;but V aca S pa t i

-m isra enumera t es it as a sil lra in his N ydya-saci-nibandha

(A pp. in the N ydya-vd rl l ika

, Bibl .

86 V A I S E S I K A PH ILOS OPHY

compare the latter w ith the former , we can hardly deny

the rela tion sh i p between the two pa ssages . The V igra ha'vyd varta

'n i i s pr inc ipa l ly engaged in refut ing the rea listi c

e xplana t ion of pramd na andprameya (Obj ects of pramana )and establ i sh ing the author

’s idea l i st i c system . Bramaud’

s

are enumerated as four perception (pra tyaksa ) , in ference

(anuman a ) , ana logy (upamdna ) , and trustworthy inst ruo

t ion 1( Sabda ) . The refutat ion in th i s work of the rela t i on

between pramana and prameya ,and the an swer and the

a ttack by NS . on the S finya-Vada ,may l ead to the

suppos i tion that the sa tra w as composed about the same

t ime as Nagarjuna and Deva ,in order to. protect the

rea l i stic standpo in t aga in st the i r attack . I f'

such be the

ca se,the date O f N S . may be p laced in 1 5 0—25 0 A .D .

4 . A S sta ted above,N S . w as comm en ted upon by an

unknown author be fore V atsyayana . The n ext extrac t

from P inga la’

s commen tary on the Madhyam ika-s’

d stra

seem s to represen t an explana tion of in ference earl i e r

than V atsyayana’

s Bhasya . But i t cannot be a scerta ined’

whether P inga la quoted from the commen tary by the

unknow n author or not .

“ I f you a rgue that the ex istence of sel f i s establ i shed

by pramana ,thi s i s not poss ible , because the four sorts of

pramana cannot support i t. The four sorts are,namely ,

1, perception (pra tyahsa ) ; 2 ,

in ference (anuman a ) , e .g .

we in fer the ex i sten ce of fire from smoke ; 3 ,ana logy

(upamd n a ) , e .g . for people who have not as yet seen brass ,bra ss i s compa red to gold ; and 4

,trustworthy instruct ion

(ap ta-ca ca n a s’

a bda ) , e .g . in assertion s l ike ‘ there ex i st

h el l (naraka ) , hea v en ( svarga ) , and th e Uttara -ku ru s

( a k ind of wh i ch are a l together una scerta inable

1 T he Upd ya -kauéa lya -hrda ya -Sd stra a lso enumera te s four, A sangaenumera t es t hree , p ra lyaksa , anumdna , and s

'

a bda (N O . 1 170 , pp . 65 a-68b) ,wh i le D ig-naga adm it s on ly t w o , pra lyaksa and anumd na . Dig

-nagasays , “ sabda and upamdna are con ta ined in pra lya ksa and anumd na

”

(N o . 1223 No. 1224, p. 3a p . 8a ) . A fter D ig-naga a l l Buddh is t s

adm it on ly tw o .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

V A I S E S I K A P HIL O S O PHY

motion,though not seen , because the sun moves from the

east to the west .1 I n l ike mann er pa in ,plea sure

,a vers ion

,

desi re,and cogn i tion ,

etc .,are k nown to ha ve a substra tum

,

just as a peopl e has th e k ing a s supporter ’ 2— th i s i s not

possibl e . The reason i s tha t in the procedure O f the

sdmd nya to d/rsta w e in fer that the sun has motion ,because

we have observed its change of place ; but in the case of

sel f its ex i sten ce cannot poss ibly be in ferred from the

five skandhas,because the conjunction of sel f w ith the

skandhas has not been Obs erved . I n the same w ay

ex i sten ce i s not proved by trustworthy instruction , because

trustworthy instruct i on has its origin in perception .

Consequently , sel f cannot be con cluded to be someth ing

exi sten t.” 3

V atsyayana expla ins the three sorts of in ference in two

ways . A ccord ing to the first of these the parvava t

i s reason ing from cause to eff ect,i.e . from the presen t

to the future,and th e s

’

esava t i s rea son ing from effect

to cause , i.e . from the presen t to the past, wh i le th e

sdmd nya to dram occurs on l y in the presen t .4 Th is

explana tion w as fol l owed by the unknown commen ta tor

on S .K . in the Ch in ese tran slat ion . The second explanati on

i s more logica l , and a lmost agrees w i th P inga la’

s , as

stated abo ve . The parvava t in th e second explana tion

i s a fter a ll the sam e as the Sesava t in th e first , as

V atsyayana suggests ,5 includ ing th e parc a ca t in th e fi rst

explanat i on . The sdmd ’nya to drsla in both the first and

the second explana tion i s the same reason ing as P inga la

1 This is the firs t explana t ion o f sdmd nya to d rsla in the Bhdsyw

T he same explana t ion is found in the Gauda -pdda -bhd sya and S abarasvam in

’

s Bhd sya on (p.

2 T he Bhdsya by V at syayana , ya t ha-icoba-ad ibhir atma icchaadeyo gunah gunas' ca dravya-samsthanah tad yad esam s thanam sa

atma-it i (p .

3 N O . 1 197, ch . xv i i i , p .

V at syayana says , trikala-yukta artha anumanena grhyant e

(P .

5 S ee 11 . 3, p . 87.

x I V . T H E NYA YA : 4 . V A T S Y A Y A N A’

S B H A S Y A 89

expla in s i t . Then there i s no logi ca l rea son for the

éesa va t in the first explanation ; hence , th e s’

esava t has

to be expla ined a fter P inga la’

s manner and'

atsyayana’

s

second explanati on 1; they are compl ementa ry to each

other. I t appears tha t V atsyayana intended in h i s Bhd sya

to comprise and un i te d i fferen t explana ti on s .

5 . I t has been stated that Deva and Har i-v arman d id not

d istingui sh the Nyaya school from th e V aiSesik a,or rath er

they d id not regard the Nyaya as a system d istinct from

the V ais’

esik a . P inga la and V a su may ha ve been of the

same Op in ion ,because , commenting on th e work s of

Nagarj una and De va ,they d id not make a di stinction

between th e two systems and con fused the Nyaya theories

w ith the V aiéesik a .

S uch a tendency i s a l so found even among fol lowers of

th e Nyaya ; s ince the author of the sil tra uses the

V aiSesik a theor ies,V atsyayana and Uddyota

-k ara use th e

V aiéesik a theor ies many tim es,and Uddyota

-k ara ca l l s

Kanada P aramarsi,and the V a iéesilca-sa tra th e s

’

astra

or the sa tra . Fol lowers o f th e two system s , a t l ea st the

N aiyayik as , d id not d isapprov e of th i s attitude . Handt

holds the op in ion tha t th e nam e V ais’ esik a in early t imes

must ha ve included fol lowers of Kanada and Gotama .

Brahmana s and Buddh ists usua l ly reck on th em as fol lowers

of one system . E ven Sank ara ,nam ing the V a iéesik a

system th e schoo l of Kana-t j , cr iti cizes the Nyaya

theories in the course of h i s refuta tion O f the former .

I I I Madhava’

s S a 'r

'

ua -dar§a fn a-samgraha th e term Nyaya

is on ly appl ied to the theory of logi c .2

1 S esavan nama pariéesah sa ca prasak ta-prat isedhe

’nya tara

-aprasangii c chisyamane sanipratyayah . Cf . S .

-ta ttva-kaumud l on S .K . , v . 5 ,

and A . B iirk , D ie Theorie der S chlussfolgerung (anumd na ) na ch der

S .-t .-kaumud i d es Vaca sp a ti

-misra,V O J . , vol . xv

,pp . 25 1—64 , 1901 .

T he d ivis ion between vita and a vtta in anumd na is , as'

the writer assert s ,dependent upon the N yaya

-koéa ,p . 728 no t for the first t ime

e stabl ished by V acaspa t i-m isra . I t has been used by Uddyot a-kara in

his N yaya-vd rttika , p . 126 .

2 D ie a tomis tische Grund lage d er Va is'

es ilca-P hilosophie, p. 26 .

90 V A I S E S I K A PH IL OSOP HY

A ccord ing to Ha l l ’s Bibliography1 V acaspati

-m i srawrote works or commen tar i e s on th e five system s o ther

than t he V aiéesik a . I n h i s case the V aiSe sik a i s probably

con s idered a s included in the Nyaya ; he wrote the

Nya'

ya-cdr ttika -tatpa

frya

-tiled .

2 Udayana 3 wrote on the

O n e hand a comm en tary on P r. E h. ,named K iranava li ,

and a pure V aiSesik a work ca l l ed the L aksand val i ‘; and

on the other the Nyaya w drttika -tatparya -p aris’

uddhi

and the K usu/maiij a li .

5 The K u sumd fij a li is a Nyaya

work,because Udayana enumerates the four sorts o f

pfr'amdna .

6 He h imsel f i s an em in ent N aiyayik a . I n

th i s work Udayana proves the ex i st ence O f P aramatman,

i.e . I Svara ,and states th e fourteen d i fferen t Op in ions

relat ing thereto .

7 The N a iyay ik a i s one of them , but the

V aiSesik a i s not enum era ted . I n th e K ira nava li he a l so

sta tes th e d i fferen t Op in i on s of the S amkhya ,the Yoga ,

the V edan ta ,and the T autat ita 8 con cern ing emancipat ion

(apava rga ) . If Udayana had con s idered the Nyaya a

di st in ct system from the V a iSesik a,he woul d ha v e referred

to th e Nyaya in the K ira-nava li (a V a iSesik a work ) .

I f h i s not ha v ing done so i s due to be ing a N a iyayik a ,

1 p . 87. Cf . Wood s , Y oga -sy stem of P a tafij a li, p . xxi.2 P ublished in V izianagram S k t . S . , vol . x ii i. V i easpa t i

-m isra a lsow rot e the N ydya

-ta ttvd loka (Ca t . of S kt .M S S . of the I nd ia Ofiice , N O .

3 A s for the d a t es of V acaspa t i-m is'ra and Udayana , see Cowe l l ’s

Introduc t ion t o his Kummdfij a li Bodas’ Introd . t o the Tarka

In trod . t o the N'

ydya-vd rttika -td tp arya

-tikd ; Candra-kfin t a ’

s In trod . to the

K usumdfij a li ; P rofessor Garbe , Bericht e d . k . s . G . d . W . P h i lo l .-h ist .

K L , 1888 and Keit h , JR A S . , 1898 , pp . 5 22 f. V acaspa t i-m isra l ived in

t he n in t h cent ury and Ud ayana in t he t en t h .

4 P ubl ished as an append ix Of the K irandra l i (Benares S S ) , and int he P and it , xx i, 625 ff ,

wit h the lVydya-muk td ra li.5 P ubl ished and tran s la ted by Cowe l l wit h a c omm en tary , Ca lcut t a ,

1864 and a lso published by Candra-kan ta w i th Udayana’

s P ra ka rana ,

a comm en t ary and a gloss , Ca lcu t t a ,1891 (B ibl .

6 Ch. 5 .

7 Ch . 1 .

8 pp. 6—8 . T autfit it a is the fo l lowers o f K umarila Bha t ta , w ho are

usua l ly ca l led the Bhat t a . S ee Upa skd ra on 7, 2 , 20, V ivrti, p . 46 1 .

Here t he T an tat ita is the represen t a t ive of the M imamsak as .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

DA S APADABTH I

A TRE A TIS E O N TH E T E N CA TE GO RIE S

O F T H E V A I S E S I K A

CHAPTER I

IND IV IDUA L P R O PE RTIE S OF T H E T E N CATE GOR IES

S ect ion — Ten ca tegories

There are t en categor ies : 1 , substan ce ; 2 ,attr ibute ;

3 , a ct ion 4,un i versa l i ty ; 5 ,

parti cular i ty 6 , inherence

7 ,poten t ia l ity ; 8 , non-potent ia l ity ; 9 , commonness ; and

10,non-ex istence .

S ection 2 .—S ubstan ce

What i s th e category substance N ine substances are

ca l l ed the category substance .

Wha t are th e n in e substances ? 1,earth ; 2 ,

wa ter ;3 , fire 4

, w ind ; 5 , ethe r ; 6 ,t im e ; 7, spa ce ; 8 ,

sel f ;and 9, m ind— these are th e n ine substan ces .

What i s earth ? Tha t wh ich ha s colour , ta ste ,sme l l

,

and touch (as i ts a ttr i butes) i s ca l l ed earth .

What i s water ? Tha t which has colour , taste , touch ,

fluid ity , and v i scid ity (as i ts a tt ributes) i s wa ter .

What i s fi re Tha t wh ich has colour and touch (as i ts

a ttr ibutes ) i s fire .

Wha t i s wind That wh ich has touch on ly ( as i tsa ttribute) is w ind .

Wha t i s e ther ? Tha t wh ich has sound on ly (as i ts

a ttr ibute ) i s ether.

What i s t ime ? Tha t wh ich i s the cause of the notion s

o f s imu l tane ity , non-s imul tan e ity ,

slow ness , and qu i ckness

w i th respect to that and th i s ( th ing) i s t ime .

94 V A I S E S I K A P H IL OS OPHY

What i s space That wh ich i s th e cause of the noti on s

O f the east , the south ,the west

, and the north , etc. , i s Space .

Wha t i s s e l f ? That of wh ich the recogn i t i on of an

inheren t cause of cogn it ion,pl easure

,pa in

,des i re

, av ers ion ,

effort , impression ,mer i t

,and dem er i t, etc . ,

i s th e mark (of

its ex i st en ce) i s sel f .

Wha t i s m ind ? Tha t o f wh i ch the recogn it i on of a

non-inheren t cause ( for the production ) of cogn i t i on ,

pleasure,pa in

,des i re

,av ersion

,effort

,m er i t

,demer i t

,and

impress ion i s the mark ( of i ts ex i sten ce) ism ind .

S ecti on 3 .— A ttribu te

Wha t i s the category a ttr ibute Twen ty-four a ttr ibute s

are ca l l ed the category a ttr ibute .

What are the tw en ty -four attr ibutes ? 1,colour ;

2,taste 3

,sm el l 4

,touch ; 5

,number ; 6 ,

extens i on

7,ind i v idua l i ty ; 8

,conjunction ; 9

,d i sjun cti on ; 1 0,

pr ior i ty ; 1 1 , post er iori ty ; 1 2,cogn i t i on ; 1 3 , pleasure ;

1 4,pa in ; 1 5 , desi re ; 1 6 ,

a v ers ion ; 1 7 ,eff ort ; 1 8 ,

grav i ty ;1 9 ,

fluid i ty ; 20,v i sc id i ty ; 2 1 , impress ion ; 22

,m eri t ;

23,dem eri t ; and 24

,sound— these are the twen ty—four

at tr ibutes .

Wha t i s colour ? Colour i s the qua l i ty wh ich has one

( substan ce ) as its substra tum and i s perce i ved by the eyes .

Wha t i s ta ste ? Ta ste i s the qua l i ty which has one

( substan ce ) as i ts substra tum and i s perce i v ed by the

tongue .

What i s sme l l ? S mel l i s the qua l i ty which has one

( substance) as i ts substra tum and i s perce i ved by the nose .

Wha t i s touch ? Touch is the qua l i ty wh ich has on e

( substance) a s its substra tum and is perce i ved by the sk in .

Wha t i s number ? N umber i s the qua l i t i es,un i ty

,and

so forth,whi ch are inheren t in e very substance and

'

the

cause of the notions w i th respect to one substance and

more than one,e tc . , that that i s one and they are more

than one , etc .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

96 V A I S E S I K A P H ILOS OPHY

a ction of one o f the t w o conjunct th ings, ( 2) conjuncti on

produced by the a ct ions of both,and ( 3) conjunct ion

produced by conjunction .

The conjunction produced by the a ction of one of the

t w o conjunct th ings i s tha t wh ich i s produced by an act i ve

and an inact i v e th ing.

The conjunction produced by the actions of both is tha t

wh ich i s produced by two act i v e th ings .

The conjuncti on produced by conjunction i s tha t inwhich an inacti ve th ing , which con s ists of many subs tances

,

conjo in s w i th ether , etc ., when the th ing i s produced (by ,

the conjunction of them ) .

What i s d isjunction ? D isjunct I on I s th e separat ion of

t w o conj o in ed th ings from each other .

It i s o f three k inds : ( 1 ) d i sjunction produced by th e

a ction o f one of the d i sjunct th ings , ( 2) d isjunction

produced by the a ction s O i -both,and ( 3) d i sjunct i on

produced by d isjuncti on .

The d isjunction produced by the a ction of one of

the d isjunct th ings and the d isjunct ion produced by the

act i on s o f both are exp la ined by the ana logy of the

conjunct-i on s .

The d isjunct ion produced by disjunction i s that in wh ich

a formerly produced substance d i sj o in s (part from part )through another cause , and th en from ether , etc a fte r

the substance has been destroyed .

Wha t i s priori ty ? P ri or i ty i s the qua l i ty wh ich i s

produced by one substan ce,upon which depends the

notion of remoteness (of another substance) occupy ing

the same t ime,etc .

,and the cause of the noti on that that

i s remot e .

Wha t i s post eri ori ty P osterior i ty i s the qua l i ty wh ich

i s produced by '

O ne substance , upon which depends th e

notion of n earness ( of another substan ce) occupy ing

the same t ime,etc .

,and the cause of the notion that that

i s near .

DA S A P A DA R TH I ; TE XT, I . 3 : ATTR IBUTE 97

What i s cogn ition ? That by which e v ery obj ect i s

understood i s cogn i t i on .

It i s of two k inds : ( 1 ) perception and ( 2 ) in feren ce .

P erception i s the sensory represen tat ion which i s

originated when sen se-organ s and so on come in to

contact w ith colour and so on , res id ing in apprec iabl e

substan ces .

In ference i s of two k inds : ( 1 ) in ference from see ing

a common property , and ( 2) in ference from not se e ing

a common property .

In ference from see ing a common property i s reason ing

wh ich produces knowledge of an in ferred Obj ect,the

whole of wh i ch i s not seen , by see ing the in f eren t ia l

ma rk,by recol l ect ing the connection of the in feren tia l

mark w ith the in ferred , and by con tact of se l f w i th

m ind .

In ference from not see ing a common property _ i s

reason ing wh ich produces al l kinds of k nowl edge of anyinv i s ibl e Obj ects by see ing the cause O f

,the effect of

,or

a th ing conjun ct w ith,t hem

,or by see ing a th ing inheren t

in the sam e obj ect , or a th ing con tradi ctory to them ,by

recol l ecting the conn ection with each (of the five obj ects) ,and by con ta ct of se l f w i th m ind .

What i s pl easure ? P l ea sure i s th e qua l i ty of one

substance,sel f , and i ts nature i s sat i sfa ct ion .

Wha t i s pa in ? P a in i s the qua l ity of one substance,

sel f , and i ts nature i s suffer ing.

What i s desire Des ire is th e qua l i ty wh ich i s inheren t

in one substance , sel f , and a ttaches to colour,etc .

Wha t i s avers ion ? A version is th e qua l ity wh ich i s

inheren t in one substance,se l f

,and shun s colour

,etc .

What i s effort ? E ffort i s th e qua l i ty wh ich i s inheren t

in one substance,sel f

, and i s vol it ion wh ich i s produced

by contact of se l f w ith m ind caused by desi re and

a v ers ion .

What i s gra v ity ? Grav i ty i s the qua l ity wh ich i sH

98 V A I S E S I K A PH ILOSOPHY

inheren t in the substances earth and water,and th e cause

O f fa l l ing down of one substance,

Wha t i s flu id i ty ? Flu id i ty i s the qua l i ty which is

inheren t in the substan ces earth ,wa ter

,and fire

,and the

cause O f flowing of one substance .

What i s v i scid i ty ? V i sc id i ty i s the qua l i ty wh ich i s

inheren t in th e substance wa ter,and the cause of cohering

in to one substance , l i ke earth ,e tc .

Wha t i s impress i on Impress ion i s of t w o kinds

( 1 ) caus e of rem in i scence‘and ( 2 ) cause of act ion s .

T he cause of rem in i scence i s tha t wh ich i s inheren t in

sel f,and i t i s a part i cular m en ta l impression produced by

t he impress ion s of th e percepti ve and the in feren tia l

knowledge of one substance .

The cause O f a ctions i s impetus,wh ich i s produced by

a c t i ons ar i s ing from impu l si on , etc .,and has one substance

as i ts substra tum,and i s possessed by corporea l substan ces .

Thi s sort O f impress ion is ( i den t i ca l w i th ) impetus .

What i s m erit ? Meri t i s of t w o kinds : ( 1 ) activ i ty

and ( 2) cessat ion .

A ct i v i ty i s the cause of (bringing about ) plea sure in

a des irable body,etc .

,i s inherent in sel f

,and destroys one

substan ce by i ts effect .

Cessa ti on i s the cause of (Obta in ing) del ight in perfect

cogn i ti on,wh ich i s free from a ttachm en t

,i s inheren t in

se l f,and destroys one substan ce by its effect .

What i s dem eri t ? Demeri t i s the caus e O f pa in and

imperfect cogn i t ion,i s inheren t in sel f

,and destroys one

substance by its e ff ect.

Wha t i s sound That wh ich has one ( substance ) as its

substra tum and i s perce i ved 'by the ears is sound .

S ection 4 .— A etion

Wha t i s the ca tegory act i on ? Fi ve a cti on s are ca l l ed

the ca tegory action .

Wha t are the five actions ? They are : ( 1 ) a ction

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 00 V A I S E S IK A PHIL OS OPH Y

respect to substances , a t tr ibutes, and actions tha t they

are exi stent .

S ection 6 ,— P a '

rticu larity

What i s the ca tegory part i cu lari ty ? The ca tegory

parti cular i ty i s tha t wh i ch exi sts in substances on ly , has

one substance as its substratum,and the cause of the

in tel l ect i on O f exclud ing others and determ in ing the one .

S ect ion 7.-I nheren ce

Wha t i s the ca tegory inheren ce The category inherence

i s that wh ich i s the cause of the recogn i tion with respect

to the in separable connection among substances,etc .

,tha t

( the one) i s here ( in th e other) ; i ts rea l i ty i s on e .

S ection 8 .— P oten tia lity

Wha t i s the category pot en t ia l i ty ? The category

poten t ia l i ty i s that wh ich i s inheren t in substan ces,

a ttr ibutes , and act ion s,and is indi spen sabl e for them to

produce somet imes co—Opera t i vely the i r ow n common

effect or sometimes independently the i r ow n particula r

e ff ects .

S ect ion 9.v —Non -

poten tia lity

Wha t i s the ca tegory non-poten t ia l i ty ? The ca tegory

non-potent ia l i ty i s tha t which i s inheren t in substances,

a ttributes , and action s , and i s indispensable for them in

order t O '

produee n e ither cO -Opera t i v ely another effect nor

independen tly other eff ects than the i r ow n .

S ect ion 1 0 .—C’ommonn ess

Wha t i s the ca t egory commonn ess ? The ca tegory

comm onness i s tha t wh i ch is subs tan ce-H ess, a ttr ibute-mess ,and act ion-n ess

,and (a l so) earth-H ess , colour-n ess , and

throwing-upwards-ness,e tc .

,which are inheren t in one

th ing conta in ed in each of the three categori es .

S ubstance-H ess i s tha t wh ich i s inherent in every

substance , the cause o f the notiOn wi th respect to every

DA S A P A DA R TH I ; TEXT, I . 10 : COMMONNE S S 1 01

substance tha t it i s a substance , exi sts n e i ther in attributes

nor in a ct ions,and i s perce i ved by both the eyes and the

touch-organ .

A ttribute n ess i s that wh ich i s inheren t in e very

a ttribute,th e cause of the n otion with respect to every

a ttri bute that i t i s an a t tr ibute , ex i sts n e ither in substances

nor in a ctions,and is perce i ved by a l l th e sense-organ s .

A ction-n ess i s that which i s inheren t in e very action,

the cause of the notion wi th respect to e very act ion that

i t i s an acti on,ex i sts n e i ther in substan ces nor in

a ttributes,and i s p erce i ved by both th e eyes and the

touch-organ .

E arth-H ess and so on are defin ed in l ike manner .

S ection 1 1 -Non -e9cisten ce

Wha t i s the ca tegory non-ex i stence Fi ve non

ex istences are ca l l ed the ca tegory non-ex i stence .

Wha t are th e five non-exi stences ( 1 ) A n t ecedent non

e xi stence, ( 2 ) subsequen t non-ex i stence , ( 3) rec iproca l

non-ex i stence, ( 4 ) na tura l non-ex istence , and ( 5 ) absolute

non-exi stence— these are ca l l ed the five non-ex i st ences .

A n teceden t non-exi stence i s tha t in wh ich the cause

and a ccessori es for substances, a ttr ibutes , or actions do not

ye t comb ine , and no eff ect i s produced .

S ubsequent non-ex i stence is tha t in wh ich the produced

substances,attr ibutes

,or action s ha ve been des troyed a fter

the force of the ir causes had been exhausted or the

a ccessor ies for the i r o v erthrow had been produced .

Reciproca l non-exi stence i s that whereby some sub

stan ce s , etc .,are not mutua l ly present in others .

N a tura l non-exi stence i s t hat whereby ex istence ,subs tances , and so on do no t yet come e ither t o conj oin

w ith or entirely to abide in one another.

A bsolute non-ex istence i s tha t whereby a th ing cannot be

produced and be absolutely ari sen in the presen t , the past ,and the future , because there i s no cause for i t.

1 02 V A I S E S I K A PH IL OSOPHY

CHA PTER II

COMMON P ROPERT IES OF THE T E N CATEGOR IE S

S ect ion 1 .—S ubstan ce

1 . S ubstances A ctive a nd I n active,etc.

Which of these n ine substan ces are acti ve ; wh ich are

inact i v e

The fi ve substances,earth , water , fire , wind and m ind

,

are act i ve,wh i l e the other four are a l together Inacti ve .

Tha t they are corporea l or are incorporea l,have

impetus or ha v e no impetus , possess pr iori ty and

poster iori ty,or possess n e ither prior i ty nor posteriori ty

,

i s expla ined a s in the case of be ing acti ve and inacti ve .

2 . S ubs tan ces possessing A ttribu tes , etc.

) V hich of these n in e substances are possessors o f

a ttr ibutes ; wh ich are not possessors of them ?

A ll the substances w i thout exception are possessors

of a t tr ibutes .

That they are inheren t causes,ha ve each substance-n ess

,

ha ve each part i cular ity,are not destroyed by the i r effects

,

and are causes wh ich presuppose o thers,i s expla ined in

l ike manner.

3 . S ubstances possess ing Touch, etc.

Which of these n ine substances possess touch ; wh ich

do n ot possess i t

T he four substances,earth , wa ter, fire , and wind , possess

touch ,but the other five do not possess i t .

Tha t they are both producti v e substances and causes O f

substances , a ttr ibutes,

and act ions , or are on ly causes

of e i ther substances , or a t tri but es , or a ct ions (but are not

product i ve substances) , i s expla ined in l ike manner .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

104 V A I S E S I K A PH ILOSOPHY

Wha t are the fourte en a ttr ibutes They are ( 1 ) colour ,

( 2) taste , (3 ) smel l , (4 ) touch , ( 5 ) number , ( 6 ) extension ,

( 7 ) ind i v idua l i ty , ( 8 ) conjun ction , (9 ) d isjunction , ( 10)prior i ty

, ( 1 1 ) posteri ority , ( 1 2) gra v i ty , ( 1 3 ) fluid i ty , and

( 1 4 ) impress ion .

By rea son of how many a ttributes i s wa ter ca l l ed the

possessor of attributes ? It i s by reason of fourteenattributes .

What are th e fourteen attributes They are ( 1 ) colour ,

( 2) ta st e , (3 ) touch , (4 ) num ber, ( 5 ) extension , ( 6 ) in

dividua lity , ( 7) conjunction , ( 8 ) d isjunction , (9) priori ty ,

( 1 0) posteriori ty , ( 1 1 ) grav ity , ( 1 2) fluid ity , ( 1 3 ) v iscid ity ,

and ( 1 4 ) impression .

By reason O f how many attribut es i s fire ca l l ed the

possessor O f attr ibutes I t is by reason O f el e ven

a t tr ibutes.

What are the ele ven a ttr ibutes ? They are ( 1 ) colour,

( 2) touch , ( 3 ) number , (4 ) extens ion , ( 5 ) ind i v idua l i ty ,

( 6 ) conjuncti on , ( 7) d isjun ction , (8 ) priori ty , ( 9) posteriori ty ,

( 1 0 ) v iscid ity ,and ( 1 1 ) impress ion .

By reason of how many a ttr ibutes i s w ind ca l l ed the

possessor of a ttr ibutes I t is by reason of n in e

a ttr ibutes .

Wha t are the n ine a ttr ibutes ? They are ( 1 ) number ,

( 2) exten sion , ( 3 ) ind i v idua l i ty , (4 ) conjunct ion , ( 5 ) d is

junct ion , ( 6 ) prior i ty , ( 7) posteriori ty , (8 ) touch , and

( 9) impression .

By reason O f how many a ttributes i s ether ca l l ed the

possessor of a ttributes I t i s by rea son O f si x attributes .

Wha t are the S ix a ttr ibutes ? They are ( 1 ) number,

( 2) extens ion , ( 3 ) ind i v idua l i ty , ( 4 ) conjunct ion , ( 5 ) d i s

junct i on ,and ( 6 ) sound .

By rea son of how many a ttr ibutes i s t ime ca l l ed the

possessor of a ttr ibutes It is by reason O f five

a ttr ibutes .

What are the five attr ibutes ? They are ( 1 ) number ,

DAS A P A DA R TH I ; TEXT, 1 1 . 1 : SUBSTA NCE, 7 1 05

( 2 ) extension , (3 ) ind i v idua l i ty , ( 4 ) conjunction ,and

( 5 ) d isjunction .

S pace i s expla in ed as in the case of t im e .

By reason O f how many a tt ribut es i s sel f ca l l ed the

possessor of a ttri butes ? I t i s by rea son of fourteen

a ttr ibutes .

Wha t are the fourteen attr ibutes They are ( 1 ) number ,

( 2) extens ion , (3) ind i v idua l i ty , (4 ) conjunction , ( 5 ) d is

junct ion , ( 6 ) cogn ition , (7) pleasure , (8) pa in , ( 9) des i re ,

( 10) a vers ion , ( 1 1 ) effort , ( 1 2) m er i t , ( 1 3 ) demer it , and

( 1 4 ) impression .

By reason of how many a ttr i butes i s m ind ca l l ed the

possessor of a ttr ibutes ? I t i s by reason of e ight a ttr i butes .

Wha t are the e ight a ttr ibutes ? They are ( 1 ) number ,

( 2 ) extens ion , (3 ) ind iv idua l i ty , ( 4 ) conjunction , ( 5 ) d i s

j unction, ( 6) prior ity , ( 7) poster iority ,

and ( 8 ) impressi on .

S ect ion 2 .— A ttribu te

1 . A ttributes P ercep tible and I inp er’

cep tible

Wh ich o f these tw enty-four a ttr ibutes are percept ibl e

wh ich are imperceptibl e

Col our,ta ste , smel l , and touch are e i ther percept ibl e or

impercepti bl e .

I n what cond itions are they perceptibl e ? They are

perceptibl e when t lfey ab ide in la rge substan ces and more

than one substance .

I n wha t cond itions are they imperceptibl e They are

impercept ible when they abide in a toms and binary

a tom i c compounds .

S ound i s a l together percept ibl e .

N umber , e xtens ion ,ind i v i dua l i ty , conj unction

,di s

j unct ion ,prior i ty

,poster ior i ty

,flu id i ty

,v i sc id i ty

,and

impetus are d iscr im inated as I n the case O f colour,ta ste ,

smel l,and touch .

Cogn i t ion,plea sure

,pa in

,desire

, a vers ion,and e ffort

a re perceptibl e to sel f .

1 06 V A I S E S I K A PH ILOSOPHY

Mer i t,demerit, impress ion ( and gra v i ty ) are on ly

impercept ibl e .

2 . A ttribu tes a s P rodu cts and N on -products

Which of these a ttr i butes are products ; which are non

products

Cogn i t ion,pl ea sure

,pa in

,desi re

,a v ers i on

,effort

,m eri t

,

d em eri t,impress ion

,d isj unction

,priori ty

,poster ior i ty

,and

sound are on ly products .

The other a t tr ibutes are e i ther product s or non

products .

Co lour,taste

,smel l

,and t ouch a re

,i f they are possessed

by earth,a ltogether products .

Colour,tast e

,touch

,fluid i ty , and v i scid i ty

,when

inheren t in (aqueous) a toms , are non-products,and the

same a ttributes , when inheren t in binary a tom i c

compounds,are product s .

Gra v i ty i s explained in l ik e mann er .

Co lour and touch abid ing in fire,and touch abid ing

in wind are expla ined l ike the a ttr i butes Of water .

Flu id ity abid ing -in bo th earth and fire i s a l together

a product .

N umber one ( = un i ty) and s ingle ind i v idua l i ty a re

e i ther products or non-products,a ccord ing as they abid e

in produced substances or non-produced substances,and

numbers from dua l i ty upw ards and dua l ind i v idua l it i es,

e tc . ,are a l together product s .

L argeness,sma l ln ess

,Shortn ess

,and l ength are a l toge ther

products,but Spheri c i ty i s a lways n on -product .

Conjunctions O E corporea l substances w i th another

corporea l , and those O f corporea l substances wi th another

incorporea l subs tance,arep roducts .

3 . A ttr ibu tes E terna l a nd N on -eterna l

E terna l ity and non-eterna l i ty o f a t tr ibutes are expla ined

a s in the case O f product s and non-product s .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 08 V A I S E S I K A PH ILOSOPHY

P r iori ty and pos ter iori ty ha v e each as thei r cause s

(a substance wh ich ) occupi es the sam e t im e,e tc .

,and

(upon wh ich ) depend the notion of remoteness and

n earness . ( 8 )Cog n i ti on i s twofold , percept ion and in feren ce . ( 9)P ercept i on i s fourfold

, ( 1 ) doubtful percep t i on , ( 2)deci s i v e percept i on

, ( 3) imperfect percep t i on ,and ( 4 ) perfect

percept ion . ( 10)What i s th e cause of doubtful perception ? Doubtfu l

percepti on i s that wh ich i s preceded by the percept ion o f

properti es common to more than one obj ect , has its caus e

in con tact of sel f w ith m ind caused by the recol l ection

of specific properti es O f the a l ternati ves,

and is the

knowl edge in'

del iberation,as wh ich i s th i s ( 1 1 )

Wha t i s the cause of dec isi ve perception ? Decis i ve

perception i s tha t whi ch i s preceded by doubtfu l perception,

has its cause in contact o f sel f w ith m ind caused by

the a scerta inm en t o f th e spec ific property of one O f the

a l ternat i ves,and i s the knowledge in assertion

,as

“ it

i s th i s ( 1 2 )What i s the cause of imperfect percept ion ? Imperfect

percept i on i s tha t wh ich is preceded by the percept ion

of properti es common to more than one Obj ect,has i t s

cause in contact of sel f wi th m ind caused by

'

tak ing

improperly the spec ific property of one O f the a l ternat i v es

for tha t of th e other,and i s the knowledge

’

in incorrect

a ssertion . ( 1 3)What i s the cause of perfect perception ? P erfect

perception i s tha t wh ich i s preceded by the perception

of properti es common to more than one Obj ect,has its

cause in contact of s el f w i th m ind caused by the

percept i on of the specific property of one of th e

a l t ernat i ves , and i s know l edge w i thout error. ( 1 4 )In ference i s a l so class ified and expla ined , as in the case

of perception . ( 1 5 )P erception i s produced in three ways

, ( 1 ) perception

D A S A P A DA R TH I ; TEXT , I I . 2 : ATTR IBUTE,5 1 09

produced by contact of four ( factors ) , ( 2) percept i on

produced by contact of three ( fa ctors) , and (3) percep

t i on produced by con tact of two ( fa ctors ) . ( 1 6 )Wha t i s the perception produced by con tact of four

( factors) It i s the sensory representa t ion . A ll th e per

ceptions of colour , taste , sm el l , touch , number , exten s ion ,

ind i v idua l i ty ,conjunction

,d isjun ction , pri or i ty

,pos

t eriority ,flu id ity ,

v i sc id ity,impetus , wh ich are a l together

apprec iabl e (by resi d ing in -more than one and coloured

substances ) , and of the action s throw ing upwards, etc . ,

abid ing in th e substances , ea rth , wa ter , and fire,and O f

ex i stence,commonn ess

,potent ia l ity

,and non-potentia l i ty

,

w ith the excepti on O f th e poten tia l ity , non-poten tia l i ty

,

and sound-H ess wh i ch are inheren t in sound,have the i r

causes in con tact of four ( fa ctors) , sel f , sen se-organ s , m ind ,and obj ects . ( 1 7)Wha t i s the percept ion produced by contact of three

( factors ) ? A ll th e percept ion s O f soun d and of Obj ects

l ike poten tia l ity ,non-potent ia l i ty

,sound-n ess

,and ex ist

ence wh ich are inherent in sound hav e the ir causes in

con tact of three ( factors ) , se l f , sense-organ ,and m ind . ( 1 8 )

Wha t i s the perception produced by contact O f two

( factors) A ll the cogn itions o f the obj ects l ik e pleasure ,pa in

,des ire

,a vers i on

,and e ffort

,and of the Obj ects l ik e

poten tia l i ty , non-poten tia l i ty

,commonn ess

,and ex i sten ce

wh i ch are inheren t in th ese (fi v e ) attri butes,ha ve the ir

causes in con tact o f two ( factors ) , s e l f and m ind . ( 1 9)In ference i s tha t wh ich is preceded by the knowl edge

of one of two th ings inherent in th e same substance,and

of a th ing con trad ictory to the oth er , and has its cause in

contact -of sel f w ith m ind,tak ing place in consequence

o f the recol l ection of the conn ections between them . (20)P l easure a nd pa in ha ve the i r causes in contact of the

four ( factors) , th e three , and the two , caused by meri t

and demer i t. ( 21 )Desire and avers i on ha v e th e i r causes in con tact of

1 1 0 V A I S E S I K A PHI LOSOPHY

sel f w i th m ind caused by pleasure,pa in

,rem in i scence

,

and imperfect percept ion . ( 22)E fl

'

ort has its cause in con tact o f s el f w i th m ind caused

by des i re and a v ers ion,in th e ins t inc t to l i ve

,because ‘

there i s a s yet no des ire,and in a ctions l ik e brea th ing in

and out , e tc . ( 23)What i s the cause of impetus ? Its cause is th e impetus

o f the acti ons ari s ing from impul s ion . ( 24 )Meri t and dem eri t are preceded by des i re and a v ers i on

,

and ha v e thei r causes in con tact o f sel f w i th m ind,caused

by hearing and reflect ing on,or by d isrega rd ing the fact

that m er i t and dem eri t ( severa l ly ) bring about a pure or

impure state in the future l i fe . ( 25 )Impressi on

,i.e . the cause of rem in i scen ce

,has its cause

in con tact of se l f with m ind caused by th e impression of

percept i ve and in feren t ia l knowl edge . ( 26 )S ound has a three fol d origin ,

as ( 1 ) sound originated

by conj unction , ( 2) sound origina ted by di sjunction ,and

( 3 ) sound origina ted by sound . ( 27)S ound originated by c onj un ct ion has i ts cause in the

conjunct i on of substan ces possess ing touch , in (a region

o f ) ether accompan i ed by impetus , which causes the con

juncti on o f th e substan ces . ( 28 )S ound origina ted by d i sjun ct ion has its cause in the

d isj unction of substan ces possess ing touch , in (a region

of) e ther accompan i ed by impe tus , which causes th e -d i s

jun ct ion o f the substances . ( 29)S ound origina ted by sound has its cause in th e sound

in an empty region a ccompan i ed by impetus causing

th e conjunction and d i sjunction of substan ces possessing

touch . ( 30)

6 . A ttribu tes abiding in on e S ubstan ce, etc .

Which of these twen ty-four a ttr ibutes ha v e one

substance as thei r substra tum ? Which ha v e more than

one substance as thei r subs tra tum ?

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 1 2 V A I S E S I K A PH I LOSOPHY

E ach spec ia l cogn i ti on i s destroyed by i ts effects,i.e . the

impress ion of a ll other cogn i ti ons . ( 6 )The la st produced sound i s destroyed by a ll i ts causes . 7)The las t produced attr ibutes o f sel f are a l so destroyed

by the ir causes . ( 8 )P l easure and pa in are destroyed by the ir ( respecti v e )

effects,i.e . des i re and a v ers ion . ( 9)

Meri t and demer i t are des t royed by the i r ( respective )causes . ( 10 )Desire and avers i on are destroyed by the i r effec t

,

i.e . effort . ( 1 1 )P l ea sure and pa in are destroyed by the i r ( respect i ve)

causes . ( 1 2)Int ermedia tely produced sounds are expla ined as abo v e

( i.e . are destroyed by the i r causes and eff ects) . ( 13)E ffort and pa in

,which are the a ttr ibutes o f s el f

,are

,

when they conj o in wi th th e substances possess ing touch,

not in the re la t ion of destroyer a nd destroyed,a s effect or

as cause . ( 1 4 )Impress ion

,i.e . the cause of rem in i scence

,wh ich i s an

a ttribute of s e l f , and pa in are not in the re la t ion of

destroyer and destroyed a s cause or as effect. ( 1 5 )Impress ion ,

i.e . the cause o f rem in i scen ce,i s d estroyed

by its effects . ( 1 6 )Impress ion

,i.e . the cause of act ions

,when i t conj o ins

wi th substances possess ing touch,is not destroyed by its

eff ects . ( 1 7)The numbers from dua l i ty upwards are not opposed to

thei r eff ect s,i.e . the n ot ion s of dua l i ty , et c .

’

( 1 8 )Indiv i dua l i t i es in dua l ind i v idua l i t i es

,et c .

,prior i ty , and .

posterior i ty are expla in ed a s in the case of the numbers,

dua l i ty,e tc . ( 1 9)

Colour, taste , smel l , and touch inheren t in atoms

belonging to earth,and the conjunct ion of these ( four

a t tributes) wi th fire,are not in the rela tion of destroyer

a nd destroyed as e ff ect s or as cause . ( 20 )

D A S A P A DA R TH I ; TE XT, I I , 2 : ATTR IBUTE,8 1 1 3

Conjuncti on and d isjunction are not mutua l ly ( in th e

relat ion of) cause and effect , but they are opposed to each

other . ( 2 1 )The colour

,etc .

,in

"

th e a tom s of a substance,wh ich

produce the colour , etc . , of bina ry a tom i c compounds of

the same cla ss , are no t destroyed by the i r effects,because

they are effects of the sam e c la ss . ( 22)The l ast produced effects

,i.e . the colour, etc .

,of

substan ces cons isting of parts , are not destroyed by the i r

causes,i.e . colour , etc . , because they are of the same

c lass. ( 23)A ll the 'interm ed iately produced colour

,etc .

,of

substances cons ist ing of parts are not destroyed by the i r

e ff ects and causes of the same class , i.e . colour,etc . ( 24 )

Colour , etc. , in a substan ce are common ly n ot ( in th e

rela t ion of ) effect and cause , and are not Opposed to one

anotherf ( 25 )E very a ttr ibute i s not opposed to its substance . (26 )

9. A ttribu tes inhering in S ubstan ces , etc.

Wh ich o f these twenty -four attributes inhere in

substances ; wh ich do not inhere in substances ?

E very attribute inheres in substan ce .

Tha t they are a l together w ithout a ttr ibutes,are inact ive

,

are non-inherent causes , are the signs of th e substance s

possess ing the a ttr ibutes, are incorporea l , and do not

cons is t of pa rts , i s exp la ined in l ik e manner .

S ect ion 3 .— A ction

1 . A ction s inhering in S ubstan ces , etc.

Which of these fiv e action s inhere in substances ; w h ich

do no t inhere in them

A ll inhere in substances .

That they have each one substance as the i r subs tra tum ,

a re incorporea l , are w i thout a t tr ibutes , do not consi st of

parts , are the (absolute ) causes of d isjunction and con

j unct ion , are producti ve and products,are non ~aggregates ,

1 1 4 V A I S E S I K A PHIL OS OPHY

a re the s igns of substance,are causes of impress ion

produced by impu ls ions,etc .

,and ha v e causes of di fferen t

cla sses,i s expla ined in l ike manner .

2. A ction s ha ving S ubstan ces as their S ubstra ta

Which substan ces ha v e these five act ion s respect i v el y

a s being the i r substrata

The a ction throw ing upw ards has i ts subst rata in a l l

of earth,wa ter

,fire

,wind

,and in m ind .

The a ction s throwing dow nw ards and go ing are expla in ed

a s in the ca se of the act ion throw ing upwa rds .

The a ct ion con t ract ing has i ts Substrata ‘in large and

l ong substances, wh ich are effects of a pa rt i cula r a rrange

m en t of v ery loosely connectedparts .The action expand ing i s expla ined as in the case o f th e

acti on con tracting .

3 . A ction s p ervad ing their S ubstra ta

Which of these fi v e a ct i on s pervade th e i r substra ta ;wh ich do not pervade them

A ll these a cti on s per vade the i r substrata .

S om e say tha t act ion s abid ing in a tom s and m ind

per vade the i r substra ta,wh i le those -abid ing in bina ry

a tOnI ic compounds , etc .,do no t pervade the i r substra ta .

4 . A ct ion s in Body ,etc.

O f th es e five the a ct ion s ex i st ing in sid e (O f a body )ha v e as the i r inheren t caus e the body and i ts organ s

,

i.e .,the four s ense-organ s of smel l , ta ste , touch , and s igh t ,

and m ind . ( 1 )The first a ction in the body i s preceded by desi re , and

has conjunction wi th , and effort of , se l f a s its non-inheren t

causes . ( 2 )The second a ction and so forth have ( in order) the

impression ( of the i r la st act ion ) as the i r non-inheren t

cause .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

V A I S E S I K A PHILOSOPHY

A ctions caus ing change in trees , etc ., and those resid ing

in bina ry a tom i c compounds , etc . , are a s expla ined in th e

ca se o f act ions produc ing bod i es . ( 1 8 )The first a ction of the incl ina tion and repugnance in

m ind has conj unct i on of m er i t and dem er it wi th sel f as its

non-inheren t cause . ( 1 9)The second action and so forth are as expla in ed

above . ( 20)The first action of the a cti on s in th e ( presen t) world ,

wh ich represen t the r ipen ing of the happy and the unhappy

eff ects of crea tures,ha s conjunction of m er i t and demeri t

.

with se l f as i ts non-inheren t cause . ( 21 )The second a ct i on and so on are as expla in ed abo v e . ( 22)The act ions in earth

,wa ter , and fire resu l t ing from

impu l s ion,impact

,and ( conjun ct ion wi th ) the conjunct

ha v e conjunct ion,gra v i ty , flu id i ty ,

effort,and impetus a s

t he i r non-inheren t causes . ( 23)These can be any of the act ion s throwing upwards and

so on accord ing to the c ircumstances (or the i r substra ta ) .

I f they are in fi re,gra v i ty i s om i tt ed ; i f in wind , flu i d i ty

i s om i t ted ; and i f in m ind,impul s ion and impact are

om i t ted . (24 )S ect ion 4 .

—E xisten ce

I S the before-men t ion ed ex i stence a product or non

product 7

E x istence i s certa in ly non-product .

Tha t i t i s eterna l,i s w ithout a ttributes in i t sel f , i s

inact i v e,and does not con si st of parts , i s expla ined as

above .

E xistence possesses ( i.e . ex i sts in ) substances , a ttri butes ,and a ct i ons ; it i s som eth ing inheren t in these ( three )ca t egories

,wi th the exception of un iversa l i ty ,

poten tia l i ty ,

non-poten t ia l i ty ,commonn ess , and part icula ri ty ,

and i s

one ; it i s the cause of the genera l not ion (wi th respect

t o the first three ca tegori es) tha t they are exi sten t and an

independen t en ti ty .

DA S A P A DA R TH I ; TEXT, 11 . 5 : PARTICUL AR ITY 1 1 7

S ection 5 .4 P articu larity

P articulari ty ex ists in substances , ha s one substance as

its substratum,is the cause of the in tel l ecti on of exclud ing

others and determ in ing the one , ex i sts in eth er , space , and

tim e,i s the cause of the not ion w it h respect to e ther

,etc .

( tha t that i s eth er , space,or t ime) , and is e terna l , non

product,i s w ithout a ttr ibutes and inactive

,does not

con si st o f parts,i s som ething inheren t in th e ca tegory

( substance ) , with the exception of ex i stence , poten tia l i ty ,

non-poten t ia l i ty,commonn ess

,and parti culari ty

,and i s

more than on e .

S ection 6 .

— I nheren ce

Inherence i s on ly one , eterna l , and non-product ; i t does

not con si st of parts ; i t i s incorporea l , and the cause of

be ing inheren t o f a ll substan ces,

a ttr ibutes , act ion s,

un i v ersa l i ty , pa rt i cular ities , poten tia l ity , non-poten t ia l i ty ,

and commonn ess ; i t has for mark th e recogn i t ion (of

i ts ex i stence ) .

S ections 7—8 .— P oten tia lity and N on -poten tia lity

I S the before-m en tioned potentia l i ty a product or non

product

P otent ia l ity i s certa in ly non-produc t.

Tha t i t i s e terna l , w i thout a ttr ibutes , ina ct i v e , does not

consi st.

O f parts,and i s incorporea l

,i s expla ined in l ike

mann er .

P otentia l i ty i s d i fferen t a ccord ing a s it resides in

substances , attr ibutes , or a cti ons i t i s someth ing inheren t

in ‘ th e ca tegori es,wi th th e excep t ion o f un i v ersa l i ty

,

poten tia l i ty ,non-poten tia l i ty ,

commonn ess,and particu

larity ; it is more than one,and i s a l so the cause O f th e

no t i ons (w ith respect to the ca tegories tha t th ey are

poten t ia l ) .

N on-potentia l i ty i s expla ined by the ana l ogy o f

po tential i ty .

1 1 8 V A I S E S I K A PH ILOSOPHY

S ect i on 9 .

— Commonn ess

Commonn ess as substance-H ess per vades the ca t egory

subs tance ; i t is som ething inherent in substan ces,it i s on e

and incorporea l,i t does no t con si st of pa rts , i t i s inact i v e ,

wi thout a ttr ibu tes,e terna l , and non-product ; it inheres

common ly in a ll the substan ces , but it i s d i fferen t from

the commonnesse s in a t t r ibutes and a ct i ons .

Commonn ess as a t tr ibute-n ess as a ct ion—n ess,or a s

earth-n ess i s expla ined a s in the case of commonn es s

as substance-H ess .

S ect i on 1 0.— N on -ecc isten ce

1 . Non -ex istences E tern a l'

and N on -eterna l

Which of’

these fi v e non-exi sten ces are et erna l ; wh ich ,

are non -eterna l

A n teceden t non-exi stence i s non-eterna l , because it i s

Opposed to the products of substances,a t t ribut es

,and

a cti on s .

S ubsequen t non-exi stence , rec iproca l non-exi stence , and

absolute non-ex i stence are a l together eterna l,because they

are n ot des troyed by substances , etc .

Natura l non-ex i stence i s e i ther eterna l or non—eterna l .

I n wha t cas e is na tura l non-exi stence ete rna l

The substances earth,etc .

,are not in the inherence

rela t i on to o ther a t t r ibut es ( than the i r ow n ) .

Un i versa lity pa rt i cular i ty ( i.e . commonn ess ) , l ike

substan ce-n ess ,e tc .

,poten t ia l i ty

,non-poten tia l i ty ,

and

par t i cula ri ty,does not inhere in substra t a other than its

ow n ( respect i v e ) .

E x i s tence does not inhere in un i v ersa l i ty,etc.

I n w hat case i s n atura l non-ex i st ence non-eterna l 7

There i s the ca se where a substance does not conjoin

with other substances,but wi l l certa in ly conj oin w i th

t hem a fterw ards . (Before the‘ conjunct ion takes place )

the former does not ex i st in the latter .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

D A S A P A D A R T H I

N O TE S

CHAPTE R I (pp . 93— 101 )

S ection 1 .— Ten Ca tegories (p . 93)

The term padartha (ca tegory ) has been etymol og ica l ly

rendered into Chinese . The tran sla tion I S l itera l ly th e

mean ing or Obj ect of a word 1 K w hé i-c i expla ins , pada

m ean s a footstep . Just as a man seeks an el ephan t by

tra cing h is footsteps,we understand the m ean ing by pada ,

because p ada i s the footst ep of the m ean ing . Word

w a s used by ea rl i e r tran slators a s the tran slat ion of pada ,

and a ccepted by th e presen t t i ansla tor (Yuan Chwang ) .2

I n V . .S th e term p ada is not met wi th,and th e

exact m ean ing of pada rtha i s not expla ined . A rtha

( O bj ect ) , in V .S . has no t an abstract m ean ing,but it i s

the designa t ion o f substan ces,attr ibutes

,and act ion s .3

I t m ean s,therefore , a th ing wh ich ex i sts as an en t i ty in

the Obj ecti ve and th e subj ective world . A nd pa da

corresponds to s’

a bda in V .S . But s’

abda in V .S . has

three mean ings,sound and . vo ice

,word , and con cept .4

Word and concep t are trea ted a s the same,and l e tters

whi ch represen t them are a l so cons idered as th e same .

E very concept has a correspond ing obj ect , because th e

origin o f a concept i s in the obj ect . But th e concept and

the obj ect are enti rely independen t of ea ch other , so tha tthe i e is no connection betw een them . Tha t th e ex istence

o f the obj ect can be in ferred from th e con cep t i s , t here

fore,convent iona l though i t i s a lw ays va l id .

Cf . M ax M ul ler, “ Bedeutung , Ziel Oder Gege ii s tand (artha ) einesWortes (pada ) ZDMG ,

v i p.

Cf . Tarka-d ip ikd , p . 2 , A tha lye’

s not e s , p. 73 ; N . S . , 2 , 2 , 60.

3 8, 2 , 3. 8

,1 , 25

—27 ; 2 , 2 , 2 1-37 7 , 2 , 14—20.

5 S ee N . S . 2 , l , 5 , 5 (na Samayikac chabda-artha-sampra tyaya sya ) .

1 22 V A I S E S IxA PH ILOSOPHY

Th is doctr in e resul t s from the fundam enta l cha ract er i st i c

o f the sys tem . The syst em i s a rea l i sm,or ra ther a na i v e

rea l i sm in the ep istemologica l and th e metaphys ica l sen se

o f the t erm . For the sys tem the Obj ect i v e and the

subj ect i v e world ha v e equa l ly a rea l ex ist ence. Thi s

cannot adm i t of doubt,and the id ea l i st i c cri ti cs of th e

Obj ect i v e world o r subj ect i ve cogn i t i on are not a t a ll

known to the author.

of V .S . A s a matt er o f fact,the

ex i st ence of the con cept of an obj ect , subj ecti ve as w el l

as obj ect i ve,is the logica l reason for and the rea l con

s equence O f the exi sten ce of . the obj ect . The m ean ing o f

the term p add rtha i s unders tood from t h i s s tandpo in t .

The S ix categor i es,as corresponding

‘

to th e concept s , ha v e

each the i r rea l i ty ; but the classifica ti on in to S ix has its

ground in our con cepts . Tha t i s to say ,the d i s tinct i ons

in our concepts ha ve been extended or proj ect ed into the

Obj ects .

The start ing-poin t O f the system i s the , obser.va t ion of

obj ect s , and an Obj ect i s ana lysed pr incipa l ly in to three

ca tegor i es . A n obj ect i tsel f i s ca l l ed substance (dravya ) ;i ts qua l i ty , quan t i ty ,

and so on are ca l l ed a t tr ibut es

(guna ) , and its act i v i ty i s a ct i ons (ha rman ) . S ubstan cei s thus defined ,

“ th e defin i tion of substance i s tha t it is

possess ed of a ct i on s and a ttri butes,and i s an inheren t

cause a ttr ibut e thus,

“ tha t it has substan ce a s

a substra tum,i s w i thout a ttributes and i s not a cause o f

conjunct ion s a’

nd di sjunction s be ing unconnect ed w i th them ,

9

is the defin i ti on of a t tr ibut e ”

; and act ion thus,

“tha t

it abides in one substan ce , is w i thout a t tr ibutes,and is

the absolut e cause O f conjunct ion s and d i sj unct i ons , is

the defin i t i on of a ct ion .

” 3 S ubstance s may be defined

1 Gough ’

s tran slat ion , a l it t le mod ified . V . S . 1 , 1 , 1 5 , K riy a-gunava t sania vayi

-karanam it i dravya-lak sanam .

2 V . S . 1 , l , 16 , Dravya-aSrayy aguna-van san'

iyoga-v ibhagesv

akaranam anapek sa it i guna-lak sanam .

3 V . S . 1 , E k a-dravyam agunam samyoga-v ibhé gesw anape k sa

karanam it i karma-lak sanam .

”

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 24 V A I S E S I K A PH IL OS OPHY

category,

and rej ects s'

a lcti sa inkhya (number ) , and

sadrs’

ya a s ca tegor i es .1 A lso S ivaditya in h i s S ap ta

padd rthi a cknowledges a bhara and rej ects s’

ahti and

sd drs’

ya ,etc .2 O ur treati se appears not to ha v e been

known to th ese au thors they oppose som e Mimamsak as .

The Mini amsa and th e V a iSe S ik a ,as sta ted abo v e

,

hav e a’

close rela tion to,and ha v e been influenced by

,

each o ther. There were a t l ea st four commen ta ri es on

AI S . before the t im e of Sabara ~ s vam in,who seem s to ha v e

l i ved in the fourth cen tury . The comm en tari e s are by

Bhartr-m i tra,by Bha va-dasa

,by Hari

,and by Upa varsa .

3

A f ter Sabara-sve’

tmin,K umarila Bha t ta and P rabha-ka ra

were the two most em inen t Mimamsak as , and theBhat ta

and the Guru school s were founded by them . S t i l l,n e i ther

of them were the first p ioneers in the i r theori es,and they

are certa in ly la t er than the author of our trea ti se,because

K umarila Bha t ta l i ved a fter,or w as a con tempora ry

of,Dharma -k irti

,and P rabha-kara w a s Once a d i scipl e of

K umarila Bha t ta . K umarila Bha t t a may be regarded as

a reformer of the M imamsa in some poin ts , wh i l e P rabha

kara i s not a reform er,a s usua l ly supposed ,

but fol lows

th e opin ion s of a certa in V rt ti-kara , who i s not K umarila

Bhat ta,and of Sabara-svam in .

4

1 K iraud va li , p. 6 , and his L a ksand va li, pp. 1,2,13.

2 S ap tu-pa dd rthi, p . 10. Cf . S iddhanta -muktd va li, pp . 1 5 —21 , Tarka

d ip ikd ,p . 6 5 . For the d a te of S ivad itya see the ed i tor’s In troduc t ion

t o the w ork , and A . Win ter ’s remark s on it (ZDMG . l ii i , pp . 323

S ivad itya l ived before GangeSa-upadhyaya , a fam ous logic ian , be causethe lat ter quote s a f ew l ines from the work .

3 Ganga-natha J ha, The P rd bhd ka ra S chool of P arva Al tmd n'

isd

( A l lahabad ,pp. 6 , 7. I n t h is work it is s t a ted t ha t S ahara

svam in l ived 5 7 B . C . ,and w as the fa t her o f k ing V ik ramad it y a ,

V araha-m i tra,and Bhartr-hari , accord ing to the trad it ion he ld by

P a iid it s . T he da te 5 7 B . c . is imposs ible, because S aba i'a-svain in refutest he Sunya-vad a and t he V ijfiana-vad a in his Bh(2sya (pp. 8 , (Cf . G .

J ha’

s In trod uc t ion t o the t ransla t ion o f t he S loka -vd rtt ika ,B ibl . I nd . )

Bu t , i f he had been a sen ior con temporary o f the three no ted men ,he

mus t have l ived about t he fourt h cen t ury. Cf . Jacobi ’s The D a tes

of the S utra s , quoted in the In troduc t ion .

P rd bhdkara S chool , pp . 10—13.

D A S A P A DA R TH I ; NOTES , 1 . 1 : TEN CATEGOR IES 1 25

K umarila Bha t ta men tion s s’

ahti , sadrs’

ya ,and a bhava

,

not as categori es , but as th e pr inc ipl es o f p ra iriana ,

l

i.e . s’

ahti for pramana in genera l,sadrs

’

ya for upam d n a

( ana logy ) , and a bhava for a bhava (pr i va tion , or n ega ti on ) ,wh i l e in the P rabhak ara v i ew s

’

a lcti and sd dréya are

t w o categor ies beside th e others .2 Consequen t ly i t may

be in ferred tha t among som e earl i er Mimamsak as s’

ahti

and sadrs'

ya were recogn i zed a s ca tegori es .

The t ime when these t w o categori es were acknowledged

as such i s not a scerta ined,but i t may ha v e been ,

a t the

la test,about the s i xth-seven th cen tury , because one V rt ti

kara,be ing look ed upon by th e P rabhak ara school as its

predecessor,must ha ve been earl ier than K umarila Bhat ta

,

and P ra Sa S ta-pada seem s not to ha ve k nown such

categor ies . I f so , th e t im e i s about th e same as that of

our trea t i se . » I n those days the doctr in es o f the s i x

categori es were changed by both the V aiSesik as and th e

Mimamsak as .

N e verthe less,the author o f the treat ise appears not to

ha ve been influenced by the Mimamsak as , s ince he does

no t a ck nowledge sd drs’

ya as a ca tegory , though s’

a lcti

i s reckon ed a s a category . S a lcti a s a category i s,in

the t reat i se,der i ved from V .S .

,and has no tra ce O f th e

influence o f th e Mimé.ih sa l<as , as sta ted in the fol low ing

notes .

3

A s for a bhava ,P rabha-kara

,d i ffering from Sabara

svam in , d id not a ccept i t e ven as a pramana .

4 But

a bhava (a sa t) i s stated in V .S . as a pr incipl e of pramd na ,

not a s a category . A bhava in th e treati s e i s o f five

1 S loka -vcirttika , Godana -se'

t tra, SI . 47 , and A numdna -p ariccheda ,

S l . 5 8—69 (E ngl ish trans la t ion , pp . 222 f . , 2432 P rabhdka ra S chool , pp. 89, 90 ; A

r

ydya-kosa ,

p. 780.

3 A s for the mean ing o f Sahti and sadrs‘ya in the M iman

'

i sa, see the

S iddhanta -muhtd va li, pp . 1 5 —2 1 M ax Mul ler’s explana t ion , ZDMG ,

vo l . v i,185 2 , p . 14 (n . ) P rabhdka ra S chool , pp . 89 if .

4 Sal ika-natha , a d isc iple o f P rabhfi-kara , P raha ra na -paficika, loc . c it . ,

p . 43 S iddhanta -muktd va li (D ina-ka rt ) , p . 18 .

1 26 V A I S E S ix A PH I LOSOPHY

sorts , and the d i v i s ion into the fi ve sorts i s a cross

d iv ision , whi ch ev i den t ly pro v es tha t h ere abhd va has

been d irectly deri v ed from V .S .

A s’

ahti i s not known to ha ve been recogn i zed as

a category by any Mimamsak as or by other fol lowers o fthe V a iSesik a . But i f a bhava is establ i shed as a n ega t i v e

ca tegory con trary to the posi t i v e ca tegor i es,subs tance

,

a t tr ibute,a ct ion

,and ex i sten ce

,a Sa lcti may ana l ogica l ly

be recogn ized as a n egat i v e compl emen t to s’

ah'ti .

A S for " comm onn e ss ( saman ya -vis’

esa ) i t has been

d i scussed in the In troducti on (pp . 66

The author of the trea tise , urged by the thoughts ofthe time

,and fol lowing the h i stori ca l d e v e lopm en t

,

es tabl i shed the four categori es and wel l adapted them

t o th e V a iSe sik a theori es .1

S ection 2 .-S ubstan ce (pp . 93— 4 )

E arth, Wa ter ,F ire , an d Wind (p . 93 )

The defin i tion s of the four substances exactly correspond

to V .S . 2, 1 , 1—4 . The sutras,2,1,1 —4

,do not descr ibe

the substances as atom s,but they m en t ion them as effects

,

or aggrega tes . A tom s are d iscussed in V .S . 2,1,8— 9 ;

1 T he V a iSesik a in S ank ara ’

s Brahma -sd tra -bhd sya O n 2 , 2 , 17, exh ibi t st he S ix ca tegories , and Hari-bhadra , a Ja in ( the n int h cent ury , ZDMG . xl ,p. a lso men t ion s the s ix ca tegories in his L oka -ta ttva -nirna ya (Giorn .

d . S oc . A s ia . i t a l iana , 1905 , p . I t seems t ha t the system s t i l l inthe seven th—nint h cent uries held t o the six ca t egories . But S ivad itya

a nd Ud ayana accepted the seven th category , and the P ramd na -mafij ariby S arva-deva ( Tarkilca-cakra -cuqldmani) hold s the seven ca tegories .

A manuscript o f the work is da ted in t he eleven t h cen tury (Benda ll ’sCa ta logue of S anskrit M S S . in the British Al useum , p . 138 , N o . 335 ;

Ca ta logue of S anskrit M S S . in the I n dia Ofi ce , p . 666 , N o . 2075 , Buhler’sR eports , Kasm ir, p . xxv i ) . T he seven th ca t egory appears t o have beenac k nowledged by the V a i sesika in t he t ent h cent ury , and the treat ised id not infl uence la ter V a iéesik a work s . But even a fter the t en t hcen t ury the T ar/ca bhasa ( the t h irteen th — fourteen t h cen t ury ) , t he

P add rtha-khandana by S iro-man i ( the s ix teen t h century ) , e tc . ,represen t

the six ca tegories (Ca ta logue of S anskrit M S S . of the I nd ia Ofi ce, p. 670,

N os . 2093—7, N o.

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 28 V A I S E S I K A PH ILOSOPHY

works , 1 th e ex i stence of a tom s i s proved by ana lys is, tha t

is,there must be a fina l l imit or end of ana lys i s

,otherw i se

ana lys i s i s end less (ana va stha,regressus ad in fin it

‘

um ) , and

e veryth ing must ha v e the sam e quan ti ty of a tom s a nd

consequen t ly the same S i ze . Thi s mode of proof i s no t

known to V .S .

A mong the four a toms 2 terren e a toms have sme l l ,a queous a toms ha ve tas te

,i gneous a toms ha ve colour, and

a eria l a tom s ha ve touch as thei r na tura l att r ibutes . A nd

to a queous a toms cold i s a l so in tr in si c,and to igneous

a tom s hea t . A ll these a ttr i butes in a toms are e terna l .

The four a toms are a cti ve and producti ve but the i r first

a ct ion is caused by a drsta (unseen force , destiny ) . They

are the ba ses of exten s i on (parimana ) , number ( sarhkhyd ) ,a nd ind i v idua l i ty (prtha ktva ) . The extens ion of them is

ca l l ed pdrimanda lya (Spheri c i ty ) , con tra ry to extended

th ings . The m ean ing of parimanda lya may be understood

by compar i son wi th the geometri ca l po in t in the str i ct

sens e of the term . Con sequently they are not non

extens i ve , but they have no perceptibl e exten si on s ; they

are s ingl e en t i t i es .

These a tom s conj o in with other a tom s and produce

compound th ings as the i r eff ects . The theory of pro

duction in the V a iéesik a i s no t production in the ordinary

sen se , but aggrega t ion ,or combina ti on of m ater ia l s . For

conven i ence sake the term production wi l l somet im es

be used .

The process o f the comb inat ion of atoms i s not cl early

sta t ed in V .S . But the author of V .S . i s probably of the

fo l low ing op in i on . First,tw o a toms conj o in together and

produce effects . Then the effect s conj o in wi th another

a tom and produce effects and so on . P r . E h.

‘ ca l l s an

1 N yaya-kanda li

,p . 31 ; Up a skd ra ,

on 1 , 2 , 6 ; 4 , l , 2 . T he V rtt i

a lso uses t h is mode o f proof .2 Cf . P r. E h.

“ bhut a ( i. e . prthivyadinam pancanam ,K irazzd va ti ,

p . 37) -atmanamva is‘

e sika-g una va t t vafir (p. 24 ) c f . no te s on ch . ii, 1 , 7.

D A S A P A DA R TH I ; NOTE S , 1 . 2 : SUBSTANCE 1 29

eff ect o f tw o a toms dvyanuka (a binary a tom i c compound ) ,and an effect of three a toms tryanuka (a terna ry atom ic

compound) , and so on . The Ch inese translator of the

trea ti se seems to ha ve gi ven a tradi t iona l explanation of

the process to h i s d i sciple,K w hé i-c i . Th is i s preserved

in the commen tar i es of the latter. The fol lowing i s an

e xtract from K w hé i-c i’

s comm en tary on N O . 1 240 1:

“ E arth,wa ter

,fire

, and wind are th e a tom s . E ven

a t the time o f pra laya or samhara ( d issolut ion of theworld ) they n e ver y i eld to complete destruction and exi st

here and there . They can ne i ther be produced nor be

destroyed ; they have eterna l rea l i ty . A toms are plura l

in number, even among the atoms o f th e same c lass .

“ A t the t ime of sarga or srsti ( creat ion of th e world )two a toms conj oin together and bi‘ing about products .2

The products ha ve each exactly the sam e quant ity a s

t he origina l two a tom s 3 the product ion is noth ing

but the aggregat ion or combinat ion of the two a toms ;

there i s noth ing n ewly crea ted and added ) , but they

ha ve each one mass ( because the two a tom s mak e

one ) and are non-eterna l,because th ey ha ve been pro

duced by the a tom s . E very product wh ich in th i s

w ay has been made from th e two Sepa ra te a tom s

conj o ins w i th another origina l (a tom ) , and mak es a

terna ry a tom . These terna ry a toms conj oin with other

ternary a tom s and produce products (whi ch are ca l l ed th e

se venth ) . The quantity of the se venth (product) i s the

same as tha t of the orig ina l s i x a toms . (Thus th e seventh

product conj o in s w ith another a tom and produces the1 T he comment ary is on the s fiap ti-md tra td -vimé a ka -sastra o f

V asu-band hu , and is preserved in the D a tnihon-zoku-zokyé , 83 , bk . ii,

pp. 1396 T he ex trac t is from pp . l 5 4b—15 5 a . A lmos t the sameexplana t ion is found in his commentaries on Nos . 1 197, 12 16 .

2 T he orig ina l tw o a toms are ca l led fa ther and mother-a tom and

the produc t is ca lled “soma tom

”T he terms are apt to lead t o

m isunders tand ing o f the process .

3 D harma-pala a lso ment ions th is characterist ic , No . 1 197, p . 3a ;

N o . 1 198, p . 49a .

1 30 V A I S E S I K A PH IL OS OPHY

product con sisting of se ven atoms .) (The products con

s i sting of ) seven a toms conj oin w ith another ( product

consi sting of seven a tom s ) and produce products ,wh ich

are ca l l ed fifteenth atomi c products . The quan ti ty of the

fi fteen th product i s exactly the same as that of the origina l

fourteen a toms . I n th i s w ay th e world i s produced .

The world,be ing produced from the or igina l tw o atoms (and

so forth ) , has the sam e quan ti ty a s a ll a tom s .” 1

A ccord ing to the trad it iona l explanat i on an a tom first

conj o in s w i th another a tom and produces a product,wh ich

i s a bina ry a tom i c compound (dvya nuka ) , and i s ca l led th e

th i rd product . The th i rd product conj oin s with another

a tom and produces a ternary a tom i c compound . A nd th i s

ternary atom i c compound conj oin s w ith another ternary

a tom i c compound ,and produces a se venth product. A nd

so on . Consequently a th i rd product con ta ins two a toms,

a se ven th conta in s s ix , and a fi fteenth con ta ins fourteen .

A mong later.

VaiSesik as the process i s d i fferently

expla in ed . S ridhara in h i s N yaya -kanda lt expla in s tha t

a ternary a tom i c compound ( tryanuka ) i s the aggrega te

of three dvyana kas (binary atom ic compounds) , and a

quaternary a tom i c compound (ca ta rana ka ) , etc .

, are a l so

made of four dvyanuka s , e tc .

2 He gi v es the reason why

the cl'vyanuka must be the,

di rect componen t of a tryanuka

and a ca tura nuka,etc. A s ingl e a tom and three a tom s

ha v e no producti ven ess , and even a dvyanuka must conj oinwith another clvyanuka to produce any of the th ings

1 T he passage has been wrongly explained by la ter comment at ors .

They underst and t he mean ing as fo l lows z— T w o a t oms con join t oge therand produce a produc t , which is ca l led t he t h ird prod uct . T he t hirdproduc t con jo ins w it h another th ird produc t (bu t never w i th anot hers ingle a t om ) and produces t he produc t wh ich is ca l led the seven thprod uc t . T he sevent h prod uc t con joins w it h anot her seven th prod uct(but never w it h ano ther t h ird or w it h another a tom ) and produces t heproduc t which is ca l led the fi f teen t h prod uct . Consequen t ly t he t h irdproduc t mus t cons is t of tw o a t oms , the seventh of four, and the

fi f teen t h of eigh t a t oms .

2 p . 32 . T he same explana t ion is found in L augak si Bhask ara’s

Tarka-kaumud i (Bombay , p . 3.

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 32 V A I S E S I K A PHILOS OPHY

i f ea rth as an a tom has colour , ta ste , sm el l , and touch as

i ts natura l attr i butes ( 2 ,1 , smel l cannot be th e on ly

logica l mark of i ts ex i stence ( 2 ,2,

the other three

a ttr ibutes a lso cla im to be mark s . A nd wat er,hav ing

colour,taste , touch , flu i d ity ,

and v isc id i ty ( 2, 1 , and

fi re,hav ing colour and touch (2 , 1 , cannot poss i bly be

in ferred from cold and hea t ( 2 ,2,4 I t must not be

held that h ea t and cold are con ta in ed in touch,as

expla ined in P r. E h. ;1 otherw ise water and fire must be

in ferred from touch , just as I n the case of w ind

( 2, 1 , 9 ,and Con sequen tly

,the proof of the exi stence

of a toms in V .S . i s to be regarded as under d i scuss ion in

2,1,8—1 3 and 2 ,

2,1 — 5 .

O n the other hand ,i f earth has colour , ta ste , sme l l , and

touch,i t must be an aggregate of the four atom s . N ow

,

t ouch i s the a ttr ibute of w ind , and wind i s in v is i bl e ;t h ings conjunct w i th w ind are inv is ible ? The touch in

e arth is an effect , so tha t i t presupposes another touch a s

its cause . Were earth a s an aggregate a possessor of

t ouch,whi ch does not abide in a terrene a tom

,the touch

wou l d have no cause a t a ll. I n l ik e mann er th e colour

and touch in water and th e t ouch in fire cannot be

man i fested , i f the three a ttr ibutes do not abide in an

a queous and an igneous a tom . The a tom i c theory of the

V aiéesik a i s con trad i ctory on th i s poin t . A s a l ogica l

c onsequence , earth must hav e col our,ta ste , smel l , and

touch as in tr ins i c attr ibutes thus wa ter i s the possessorof colour

,taste , touch ( and flu id i ty ,

v i sci d i ty , and cold ) ,fire of colour

,touch (and hea t) and wind of touch .

3

A ttr ibutes in atoms are eterna l , because the substrata

a re eterna l ; and in eff ects they are tran s i tory .

4 But

colour,taste smel l

,and touch in terren e a tom s can a l so

be trans itory . S uch are p dka-j a .

5

1 E spec ia l ly see p . 106 .

2 4,2 , 2

3 Cf . N . S . 3, l , 64 . 7 l , 2

5 7, 1 , 6-7.

D A S A P A DA R TH I ; NOTE S , 1 . 2 : S UBS TANCE 1 33

A ggrega tes are,in V .S .

,d i v i ded in to three classes

bod i es,sense-organ s , and obj ects .1 Bod ies are of two

k inds : yon i-j a and ayon i-j a , and are th e s ites of sel ves .

They are sometimes obj ect i ve and som etimes subj ect iv e .

S en se-organ s are the juxtapos it ion of sel f w i th obj ects

through m ind , and are subj ect iv e as wel l as obj ect i v e .

O bj ects are the world common to a ll creatures . O thers ’

bod i es,sen se-organ s , and e ven sel ves are included in

obj ects . O ne’

s ow n se l f,together w i th the body and th e

sense-organ s, are som etim es treated as Obj ecti ve th ings .2

I n th e world there are no th ings composed of five or three

e l emen ts . The body i s composed of terrene atom s,and

the sense-organ s are composed respecti vely of the four

atom s . The tr ipart ite l I S I O n I s not str i ctly logical

and ra th er a cross-d i v is ion . But it depends upon th e

ep i stemologica l process .

E ther, Time, and Space (p . 93)I n anc i ent S ansk rt l iterature ether (akas

’

a ) means

empty space,

3and i s not enum era ted among el emen ts .

S o a l so in Ja in i sm .

4 But la ter specula tors reck on i t as

a fi fth elem en t . I n V .S . ether i s not treated as an

elem en t .

E ther is th e substra tum of the a ttr ibute sound ; but i t

i s not l ik e earth , etc .,as th e substrata of colour , etc . , and

i s not the materia l cause of the ear, as earth , etc .,are th e

ma ter ia l causes of the other sen se-organs . E ther i s on ly

one and has not two a spects, as a cause and an eff ect. I t

i s inact i ve,l ik e t ime and space , and a ll-pervad ing. I t i s

by no means mater ia l,and natura l ly no t subj ective .

There fore ether in V .S . i s hel d to be noth ing other than

2 , 1

l , 4 ; 3 , 2 , 4 , e tc .

3 V . A . S uk thank ar, T ea chings of the Vedanta a ccord ing to Rdmdnuj a ,

loc . c it . , p . 306 Max Mul ler a lso hold s the op in ion . E mptyspace z freier R aum ,

”P etersb. WO‘

rterb. s .v .

S ee the a t om ic theory of Ja inism .

I 4

2 3

1 34 V A I S E S I K A PH IL OS OPHY

the cosm ic vacuum ,wh ich conta in s a ll obj ects and gives

room for thei r act i v i ti e s . P r . E h. and our treat i se ha ve

d i ff eren t explanation s from V .S . , but th e defin i t ion of

ether in the treat i se comes from V .S . 2,1,27.

I n V .S . the proof of the ex istence of time (kala ) runs ,aparasminn aparam yugapat ciram k sipram i t i kala

l ingam.

" 1 P r . E h. says,kala-para-apara-vyatik ara

yaugapadya-ayaugapadya

-c i ra-k sipra-pratyaya-l ingam.

” 2

The defin ition in the treatise comes from the la t ter ,“ The cause of the not ion s (p . 93) i s l itera l ly

“ the cause

of expres s ion and recogn i t ion K w hé i-c i pa raphrases th i s

defin i t ion,

“ th e cause of express ion and the cause of

recogn i tion . The origina l S ansk rt may have been pra ti ti

vyavahd ra-kdran a or -hetu ( th e cause o f recogn i t ion and

express ion ) . But P r . E h. has on ly pra tyaya (notion ) .

I n the system word and “ concept ha v e exactly the

same m ean ing and are expressed by the same term

( i.e . s’

abda ) . Consequently ,express ion and recogn i t i on

may be qui te correct as the trans lat i on of pra tyaya on

the other hand,express ion and recogn i t ion may s imply

be replaced by notion The Ch inese express ion and

recogn i ti on can a l so be abridged to notion

Cause i s probably n ot the equ i va l en t of linga or

laksana , but o f kara na 3 or hetu,because the tran s lator

usua l ly d ist ingu i shes linga or la ksa na (mark ) from

ka‘

ra na .

4

V .S . and P r . E h. descr ibe the ma rks of the exi stence o f

t ime,i.e . how t ime i s know n

, but the trea t i se descr i bes

the na ture o f t im e,i.e . wha t t im e is . Con sequen t ly ,

karana i s more appropr iate than linga .

1 2 , 2 , 6 ,“ T he no t ions o f posteriori ty in re la t ion t o post eriori ty , o f

s imulta ne i ty , o f s lowness and quick ness are marks o f the ex istence o f

t ime (Gough ’

s tra ns la t ion ) .2 p . 63 ,

“ T ime is t hat wh ich has the mark s (o f it s exis tence ) in then’

o t ions o f s imult ane ity,non-s imu l t ane i ty , s lowness and quick ness w i th

respec t to prior and posterior‘

3 S ee Upa skd ra on 7, l , 25 , where p ra tyaya-karana is used .

Cf . note s on ch . ii, 7—8.

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 36 V A I S E S I K A PH ILOS OPHY

bhuta-purvad bhavisyato bhutac ca praci tatha ca

dak sina pra tici udici ca and “ etena d ig-an taralanivye

'

tk hyz'

t tani” 1 These praet ( ea st) , da ksina ( sou th ) ,

pra tici ( w e st) , ud ici (north) , and dig-an tard lani ( the

interm ed ia te d iv i s ions) may be ca l l ed guna ( = upadhi ,

l im i t ing adjuncts 2) of space . A s space i s a l l-compre

hensive in respect to these ga na s wh ich are un i versa l ly

per vas i ve,space i s k now rf to be a ll-pervading .

“ Karane kalah undoubted ly relates t o.

n ityesv

abhavad an ityesu bhavat karane kala-ak hyeti”

,

3and

supports the above suppos i tion . Tim e i s appl i cabl e to

the cause,so that t ime i s a l so all-pervading.

Tim e and Space are n ecessar i ly inact i v e and can be

a samavd yi-kd rana "(non-inheren t causes) ; but in P r. E h.

they are ca l l ed n im itta -kd rana ( effic ien t causes) . These

two substance s ha v e the sam e nature as ether , except tha t

they hav e d i vers i ty in the ir eff ects and are non-inheren t

causes . What i s,then

,th e essen t ia l d ifference between

ether and space and tim e con sidered as causes ? I n

wha t sen se i s i t poss ibl e tha t these three substan ce s

have ind i v idua l ly un i ty and are a ll-pervad ing a t the

same place and t im e V .S . cannot sat i sfactori ly answer

the quest ion . P r. E h. and the S ap ta-p adc

‘

trthi may ,as a

l ogica l con sequen ce , be just ified when they a ssert : “akasa

kala -d isam ek a -ek a t vad ( i.e . vyak ti-bheda -abhavat“)

1 2 , 2 , 13-16 ,“ I t s ( S pace s ) d ivers ity is (caused t o be conceived ) by

the d ifl'

erence o f it s e ffect s , ( S pace is regarded as ) east because ofa pas t , future , or present con junc t ion of the sun ,

”S o l ik ewise (space

is regarded as ) sout h , wes t and north , and By t his (s im i larly ) thein t ermed iate d ivis ions of space are expla ined ”

.

2 S ee S apta -pad d rthi, p . 17, wh ich is quo t ed at the end o f t h is sub

sec t ion .

3 2 , 2 , 9 , T he term time is appl icable to a cause , inasmuch as it ex is t snot in eterna l and ex is t s in not e terna l t h ings .

”

7 , 1 , 24-5 .

5 p . 25 . S ee Bhdsd -p ariccheda ,

“evamnyaya-naya -jfiais trt iyam uk tam

n imit t a-he tu tvam”(SI . 17 ; Beer, D ivisions of the Ca t egories , B ibl . I nd .

,

pp. 12 , 96 T he explanat ion in t he K irand val i, p. 105 .

D A S A P A DA R TH I ; NOTES , 1 . 2 : S UBSTANCE 1 37

apara-jaty-abhave sa t i paribhasikyas t israh samj fi'

a

bha van ti,” 1

and akasa-adi-trayam tu vastuta ek am eva

upadhi-bhedan nana-bhutam 2 I f th e op in i on be accept

able,ether ex i sts a s th e cause

,wh i l e t im e and space are

designated from the effects . Consequen tly t im e and

space in the modern sense are in rea l ity one . A t any

ra te,the inact i vi ty and asam a

’

vayi-kara na tva O f time and

Space are un su itabl e for substan ce s,because acti v ity and

samavd yi-kc

‘

trana tva are two out of thre e characteristics

of substan ces . A nd the i r five a ttr ibutes are not specia l

to them . E ther i s an inheren t cause , and has a specia l

a ttr ibute,sound , but i t i s inact i v e . Candra-k anta ,

in his

Bhd sya on 1,1,1 5 , says tha t ether is a ct ive , as i t were , a t

the tim e of adi-sarga ( th e fi rst creat ion of the world ) .

But P r. Bh.

’

s opin ion tha t the three substan ce s are in

rea l i ty on e on l y shows th e w ay to a logica l con sequence

and has a con trad iction in i tse l f,because P r . E h. ascr ibes

u l timate part i cula ri ty (an tya vis’

esa ) to the three .

Cf . ch . 1,5 ; i , 6 ; i , 9 ; and i i

, 5 .

S elf ( p . 94 )

S el f (atman ) , as one of the n in e substances,i s treated

l ik e the other ma ter ia l substan ce s ; but i t has a grea t

s ign ificance and i s d iscussed throughout th e th i rd chapte r

o f V .S . S ome teachers start to prove th e ex isten ce of se l f

from the proposi t ion s “the objects o f sen se are un i versa l ly

k nown ”

,and th e un i versa l cogn i tion of the Obj ects o f

sen se i s an a rgum en t for ( th e ex i stence of ) obj ects other

than th e Obj ects of sen se The author of V .S . does not

approve of th i s proof and ful ly d i scusses th e nature

1 P r. E h. , p. 5 8.

2 S ap tap . , p. 17. T he Candra-kanta-bhd sya has the same Opinion ,

1 , 1 , 5 ; 2 , 1 , 27 ; 2 , 2 , 12 ; 7, 1 , 24 .

3 3 , 1 , 1—2 , pras iddha ind riya-arthah ,

and “ indriya-artha-prasiddhir

ind riya-arthebhyo

’rtha-an tarasya het uh

”. Th is explana t ion o f the 817t7

‘

a 8

d epend s upon the Candra -kd nta-bhd sya ,wh ich is more reliable , espec ial ly

in the t h ird chap ter, t han the Up a skdra and the V ivrti.

1 38 V A I S E S I K A PH IL OS OPHY

of proof . That th e author i s so careful in th i s matter

shows that the proof,as wel l as sel f , is h ighly importan t

in the system . The author’

s v ery proof of sel f i s,

“ th e

a scend ing and descend ing v i ta l a irs (or the breath ing out

and in ) , th e open ing and c los ing of the eyes,l i fe

,moti on s

of m ind , aff ect ions of the other organ s of sense , pleasure

and pa in ,des ire and a vers ion

,and effort

, are mark s o f

exi stence of -se l f ‘

( prana-apana-n imesa-unmesa-j ivana

manoga ti-indriyan taravikarah suk ha-duhk ha-iccha-dvesa

prayatnas ca-atmano lingani, 3 ,

2,4 ) These mark s have

e v idently been obta ined by compari son of a l i v ing with

a dead body,and by observat ion of otherperson s .1 The

proof i s an ind irect one and must presuppose one’s ow n

sel f-consc iousness , which i s ent i rely intuit i v e . The author

seems to hav e been awa re of th i s po in t and d i scusses i t

in 3,2 , 6—1 8 ,

whichi

show that se l f i s essen t ia l ly sel f

consciousness and d irectly proved . That se l f i s sel f

consciousness in essence is qu i te natura l in the system ,

because one of the pr inc ipa l tenets is that sel f is

something d i ff eren t from cogn it ion .

I t i s curious enough to obser ve tha t there i s in the

proof no m ention o f cogn i tion a s one of th e attributes o f

sel f . But from the sfi tra s 3, 1 ,

3,2,1 ; 3 ,

2, 3 ;

3,2

,1 9 , etc . , se l f i s know n to be the possessor o f cogn i t ion ,

and the or igina l text us ed by P r . E h. must ha v e had it

in the satra 3 , 2, and some Ch inese tran slat ions a l so

enumera te i t .

The first ha l f o f th e marks i s by no m ean s an indi s

pensable part. N .S . abridges it thus “ iccha-d vesa

praya tna-sukha-duhkha-j fianany-atmano lingam 4

; but

i t a l so uses the first ha l f of the V aiéesik a proof in th e

1 O f . S loka-vd rtt ika , E ngl ish trans la t ion ,pp. 398-400 92

2 T he Ca ndra-kanta -bhd sya’

s explana t ion is reasonable.3 p . 70, 11. 12—13 , “ atm a-l inga-adhikare buddby-adayah praya tna

an tah S iddhah . Cf . IR S . 2 , 1 , 23.

4 1 , l , 10, Jnana ( = bnddhi) is enumerat ed .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 40 Y A I S E S I K A PH IL OS OPHY

may conta in number and “ d i sjunct ion etc. , i f th e

commen ta tors are re l iabl e ; but in Chin ese etc.” i s o ftenused to d enote the plura l number of the th ings enumeratedin what precedes and does n ot serve to in clude th ingso ther than those enumera ted .

S el f in V .S . i s all-pervading and in rea l i ty one , but i t isman i fold accord ing to ci rcumstan ces

, and everyon e hasone . P r . E h. ca l ls se lf an cha and apara

-j ati-m a t on the

one hand , and sa re a -ga ta , p arama -m aha t , and sa rva

sa n’

ryogi-samd na -desa on th e other.1 The trea t i se is

natura l ly of the same op in i on,though the author does

not d ist inctly m ent ion the two sort s . S ee ch . i,3, 6

( exten sion ) ; ch . i i,1, 5 ; i i , 2 , 5 ; i i , 2, 8 1 ; i i , 3 ,

4 .

E ther and sel f are immater ia l ; but the la t ter is

consci ous and acti ve . “7i th regard to th e nature of sel f

the system i s in con t ra st w ith the V edan ta and , the

S amkhya . The latter systems ma in ta in tha t sel f i s

cogn i ti on i tsel f ( j na and c it or celana) and en t i rely

inact i v e . I n the V aiSesik a cogn i t ion i s an effect of se l f,

and sel f can recogn ize otherth ings by m ean s of cogn i t i on,

so tha t sel f may be regarded as the knower ( j nd tr ) .2

The V edan ta holds that sel f i s one,but man i fol d in i ts

appearan ce,wh i le the S amkhya ins i sts upon th e man i

toldness o f sel f ( p a ra sa ) as the fundamen ta l thought o f

the dua l isti c system ,though some tea chers hold tha tp a ra sa

rea l i ty i s one .

3 I n these respects V .S . agrees w i th the

t w o systems .

Mind (p . 94 )

The defin i t i on of m ind (man as) d i ffers from tha t o f

sel f on ly in “a non-inheren t cause (a samarayi

-karana )1 Cf . S ap tap . , arms t u paranI a

-atma k set ra-jfias ca-it i, parama-atma

is’

vara ek a eva ,k se t ra-jha asmad -adayo

’nan ta eva (p. Ud aya na

’

s

K irand va li,“sa (arms ) d viv idhah is

’

vara-anis’

vara-bhedat , ank urad ikamsak artrk amkarya tvad ghat avad it i-iévara-siddhih , d vit iyas t v

-aham-prat yaya-vedyah 5 3. ca nana vyavastha

-vacanad it i”(p .

2 Ch . ii, 2 , l ii, 2 , 5

3 Ga uda -p ada -bhasya on S .K. v v . l l , 44 (pa ramatma n ) .

DA S A P A DA R TH I ; NO TE S , 1 . 2 : S UBSTA NCE 1 4 1

V .S . says ,“atma-indriya

-artha-sann ik arse j fianasya bhavo’

bhavas ca mana so l ingar'

n” 1

and P r . E h. proves i ts

ex istence as saty-apy -atma-indriya-artha -sannidhye

jn'

ana-sukha-adinam abhut va-utpa t ti-dars

’

anat karana

antaram anum iyat e2 The presen t defin it i on can be

understood by the hel p of these two .

A samavd yi-karana includes a ll causa l re lati on s other

than sam a vd yi-kd rana ,

and i s the relat ion between two

a t tr ibutes or a ttr ibutes and act ion s presuppos ing and

a ffect ing the ir substance , i.s . samavayi-kd rana . V .S . and

th e trea t i se a ck nowledge on ly these two sorts of causa l ity

but P r . E h. and la ter works add n im itta -karana ( the

e fl icien t cause) . A samavd yi-kara na i s usua l ly d i v ided in to

two sorts : “non-inheren t causa l i ty i s causa l ity inheren t in

one obj ect conn ected w ith the re lat ion of cause and eff ect

such causa l i ty resu l ts e ither from inheren ce in the sam e

obj ect w ith the effect (as that of conjun ct ion of sel f and

m ind in th e particu la r a ttr ibutes of se l f , or of conjuncti on ,

d i sjun ction,and sound in sound

,or of conjunct ion of

threads in a c loth ) , or from inherence in th e sam e obj ect

with the cause (as that o f th e colour , etc . , of potsherds , etc . ,

in th e colour,etc of a water-pot

,etc .

,or of the colour

,

etc . ,of threads in th e col our of a c loth ) ; of these the

former i s ca l l ed in the term inology of th e V aiéesik a the

l esser,the latter the greate r.

” 3

1 3 , 2 , 1 ,“ E x istence and non-ex is tence of knowledge on con tac t o f

sel f w i th sense-organs and object s are the mark o f the e x istence o f

m ind .

”

2 p . 89 , E ven when t here is a contac t o f se l f w i t h sense-organs a ndObjec t s , w e find t hat cogn i t ion , pleasure, and so forth are no t produced ,

and from t h is w e infer ( the necessity of ) another cause ( for the produc t iono f cogn it ion ,

3 Upa skara on 10, 2 , 3—6 2,1 , 22 5

,2, 24 . A samavay i

-karana tvafi

ca karya-karana-bhava-sambandhy-ekartha-samav e t a-karanat vam t ac ca

karya-ekartha-samavayat (yat ha-atma-manah-san'iyogasya-atma-viéesa ~

gunesu samyoga-vibhaga-SabdanamSabde t antu-sarii y ogasya pat e ) k f1ranae kartha-samavayad va (ya tha k apalad i

-rfipfid inam ghatfid i-rupfid isu

t an tu-rupanam pata-rfipesu ) t a tra-adya laghri d v it iya mahat i-it i

vaiéesik a-paribhasa.

”

1 4 2 V A I S E S I K A PH ILOS OPHY

When sel f i s in con tact wi th sen se-organ s and obj ects,

cogn iti on , e tc .,sometim es occur and sometim es do no t .

Th is i rregulari ty i s caused by the presence or absence o f

another fa ctor in the con tact . Tha t i s to say ,the con

j un ct ion o f tha t factor wi th the other three factors can

produce cogn i t i on,etc . I f cogn i t i on

,etc . ,

hav e been

produced,that factor i s in ferred to ha ve been presen t

,

and the a samavd yi-kd rana for the production of cogn i tion

,

etc .,has been suff ic ient. Tha t fa ctor i s noth ing but m ind .

A s for th e defin i t ion of sel f and m ind , some comm en tators

gi ve cur ious explana t ion s . They expla in tha t sel f i s the

cause of cogn i t i on,etc . , res id ing in (samavd ya ) se l f , and

recogn i t i on,wh ich i s known to take place in sel f

,i s th e

mark of the ex istence of se l f. A nd m ind i s the a samavd yi

karana of cogn i t i on,etc and the mark of m ind i s a l so

the recogn ition produced in sel f . The Chinese tran s la t ion

may a l l ow th i s read ing ; but m ind as a substance cannot

be a sama vd y i-kd ra na and recogn i ti on as the mark of

both substances i s an und i str ibuted m idd l e (an a ikan tika) .

M ind,l i ke t ime and space

,has not i ts ow n Specia l

a ttr ibutes and i s compl emen tary to sel f,as t ime and space

are to ether. M ind,though a n ecessary factor in the

psych i ca l process,i s not a t a ll menta l , but en ti rely phys ica l .

M ind i s act i ve , and i ts first a ction comes from a drsta .

There i s one m ind in e very body,and i ts exten s ion is atom i c

(ant i ) .1 M ind i s

,in V .S .

,

2 som et imes ca l l ed an tah-karana

( the interna l organ ) , and P r. E h. regards i t a s one of the

sen se-organ s 3 (in driya ) , wh ich v i ew i s not known to our

treati se or to V .S .

A mong th e n ine substan ces ether,t ime

,and spa ce are

the p lace and condi tion for the other substan ces,and the

other substances“

are d i v ided in to two classes,m en ta l

and ma ter ia l . The system i s,there fore

,a dua l i sm and a t

1 Cf . N S . 3,2, 63.

2 9 , l , 13.

3 p . 186 .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 4 4 V A I S E S I K A P H 1L O S O P H Y

o f ga na .

“ O ne does not , a ccord ing to the comm en tators ,d irectly qua l i fy dependen t Con sequen tly

,it must be

rendered by “ the dependen t on on e”

,or “ dependen t

ha v ing one substance as i ts substratum .

” The com

m en tators are qu i te correct . “ O ne substan ce here and in

a ll the fol lowing pa ssages means “a part i cular ind iv idua l

substance not a k ind of substance,e .g . earth

The qua l ity which has one substan ce (a s i ts sub

s tra tum ) i s n ot the exclus i v e cond it i on o f th e four

a ttr ibutes , because i t i s appl icabl e to action s and even

to some substances too .

1 A nd “ perce i ved by the eyes ”

,

etc .,can a lso be appl i ed to substances and a ct i on s . Thus

the defin i t ion s may be too w ide . But “ perce i v ed by the

tongue or the nose ” i s exclus i ve,and a ccord ingly the

defin i t i ons are a l lowabl e .

Number (p . 94 )V .S . remarks because o f occurrence apart from colour ,

ta ste,sm el l

,and touch un ity ( sha ts a ) i s a d i ff eren t obj ect

2

a nd “numbers from duality (dvitva ) upwards , ind i v idua l i ty ,

conjuncti on,and d isjunction (are origina ted by more than

o ne P r . E h. defines i t ek a—adi-vyavahara

hetuh samkhya sa puna r ek a-dra vya ca-anek a—dravya ca” 4

I t must be n oted tha t number , a s an a ttr ibute,i s

inheren t in substances on ly and n e ver in a ttr ibutes or

a ct ions,because attr ibutes and a ctions are agn

’

na or

agunava t. But a t tr ibutes are a lw ays dependent upon

substan ces,a s the form s o f appea ran ce of the latter , and

can be numbered one and two,etc . Cf. 8

,1 , 4 .

That a t tr ibutes cannot possess an a ttr ibute in them

s el ves i s an importan t doctrine of the system . A s

1 Upa skdra on 1 , l , 16 .

2 7, 2 , 1 , rupa rasa gandha sparsa vya t irekad art ha antarame k a t vam (yad e tad ek at vamnama samk hya, Bhd sya ) .

3 l , l , 25 ,“ d v itva-prabhrt ayah samkhyah prthak t va

-samyogav ibhagasca

”

(anek a-dravya-arabdhah, Upa skdra ; dravya-guna-k armanamkaryam_

samanyam, Bhdsya ) .‘1

’

p. 1 1 1 , N umber is t he cause o f such express ions (or usage s ) a s onea nd the res t . I t inheres in one and more t han one substance. ”

D A S A P A DA R TH I ; NOTE S , I . 3 : ATTR IBUTE 1 4 5

a consequence o f the doctrin e,concepts ( s

’

abda ) and obj ects

(a rtha ) ha ve no re la tion to ea ch othe r,

1and there cannot

ex ist such a th ing as un i ty in a ll th ings ( sa rva -eka tva ) .2

T he la tter is probably aga in st the doctrines of the V edantaand th e S amk hya prakr ti. Though there i s not

sarva -eka tva ,wh ich . i s an erroneous (bhrd n ta ) noti on

,

the ex i stence of secondar iness (bhakti) presupposes theex istence of eka tva (un i ty) , because there is no secondar i

ness w i thout un i ty.

E xten sion ( p . 95 )

T he defin ition of extens ion (parimdna ) i s gi v en by

P r . E h. asfina

’

na-vyavahara-kd rana .

3 V .S . d iscusses

extens ion in 7,1,8—25 , and d iv ides i t into four k inds

,

large (maha t) , sma l l (ann ) , l ong (dirgha ) , and short

(hra sva ) .

E xten s ion produced in consequence o f karana -bahu tva

( a plura l ity o f causes) i s ca l led la rge and i s perceptibl e .

P erception i s poss ibl e o f th ings which are large,because

the th ings possess a n eka-dravya (more than one sub

stance ) and ritpa . S ma l l i s contrary to kd rana-bahn tva

and i s accord ingly imperceptibl e . I n l ik e manner long

and short are expla ined . The four.

k inds of exten s ion are

e terna l , when they res ide in e terna l substances , and are

non-eternal , when in non-eterna l substances . The exten

s ion o f a tom s i s ca l l ed par imanda la ( Spher i ci ty ) , wh ich

is natura l ly a lways eterna l . E ther and se l f together w i th

time and space a re ( absolutely ) large , because they are

a l l-pervad ing (vibhu ) . M ind i s sma l l (amt ) . S pher ici ty

and (absolute ly) la rge are the t w o extremes,but th ey are

not e xcluded from sma l l and la rge .

4 S pheric i ty i s a pa rt

o f sma l l,and (absolutely ) large i s a part of large . Between

them there are many rel a ti ve extens ions,and these

1 7, 2 , 14-20.

2 7 , 2 , 5—6 .

3 p . 130, T he cause o f the usages of measure.1 S ee no tes on ch . ii, 2 , l .

1 4 6 V A I S E S I K A PHILOSOPHY

relative exten sions are determined by the ex istence of

par t i cularity (vis’

esa-bhava ) and the non-ex i stence of

pa rt i cu lar ity (vis'

esa-a bhava ) , in th ings wh ich ex i st a t th e

sam e tim e .

P r. E h. precisely expla in s extens ion . Both sma l l and

la rge are of t w o k inds,e terna l and non-ete rna l . E terna l

sma l lness (n itya -anu tva ) exi sts in a tom s (paramana ) and

m ind . These t w d are ca l l ed Spher ica l ( pd rima nda lya ) .

Non-eterna l sma l lness i s in binary atom i c compounds

(d vyana ka ) . E terna l largeness (n itya-maha ttva ) i s in

ether,t ime

,space

,and sel f , and i s ca l l ed absolutely large

(parama -maha t) . N on-eterna l largen ess i s in fromternary a tom i c compounds ( tryanuka ) upwards . There

are a l so relat i ve extens i on s .1

The defin i t ions in the trea tise are der i ved from

but they d iff er therefrom in some a spects . The trea tise

expla ins th e fi v e k inds of extension . E tc. ( 1. 2) includes

the in termed iate exten sion s and corresponds to the relati ve

extens ion s .

S ma l lness (a nu tva ) res ides in bina ry atom i c compounds,

i.e . binary atom i c compound s are the samavayi-kd ra na

of sma l lness . The binary a tom i c compound i s th e

a ggrega tion of two a tom s , and i ts quan ti ty i s the same

as th e or igina l two atom s . S ma l lne ss i s th e cause O f th e

notion s wi th respect to binary atom i c compounds tha t

they are sma l l . Consequen tly sma l ln ess i s a rea l en ti ty

in the obj ect i v e world and corresponds to the concept

sma l l in the subj ect i ve world .

I n V .S . the t erm am t represen ts both a toms and the

atom i c extens i on ; but in P r . E h. and our trea ti se anu i s

the nam e of an extens i on and appl i cable t o binary a tom i c

compounds,not to a toms as such . A tom s are ca l l ed

parama -a nu in the la t ter. Thi s i s a d i fferen ce between

V .S .,and P r . E h . and th e t rea t i se . P r. E h. seems to a im

a t preci s ion ,because parama -anu as the name of a toms

1 pp. 130-2

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 48 V A I S E S IK A PHI L OSOPHY

o f combination . The comm entators base the ir explana

tion upon a m i sunderstand ing of K w hé i-c i ’s men tion of

the a tom i c comb ination . Sridhara ’

s th eory i s a l so not

correct in th is conn ection . Sankara in h i s Bhd sya statesthat atoms ha ve sma l lness and shortness

,and ternary and

quaternary a tomic compounds ha ve largeness and l ength .

The beg inn ing of largeness and l ength i s from a ternary

a tom i c compound,whi ch i s the combina tion of three

s ingle atoms .1 I f a ternary atom i c compound i s the

combinat ion of two binary a tom ic compounds , i.e . four

atoms , there i s a gap betw een sma l lness and largeness .

P lura l i ty (baha tva ) in th e treatise corresponds to

karana-bahu tva in V .S . and i s usua l ly from three upwards .“ A kind of aggregat ion

,or a certa in aggregat ion ” i s

l i tera l ly aggrega tion-d i fference wh i ch ev iden tly shows

that the origina l word w as samghd ta -vis’

esa or samha tavis

’

esa .

S pheri ci ty (par imanda lya ) i s app l ied to atom s , ether ,time , space , and sel f ; th i s i s d ifferen t from V .S . (ana )and P r. E h. (am t and m an a s) . I n Chinese “

a tom ” i s

tran slated absolutely m inut e ”

,whi ch appears to be the

equ iva l en t o f p arama -ann . A nn i s usua l ly tran sla ted“ m inute Obj ect ”

,

2 which i s used by Kumara-j i va and

others . “ A bsolute -ana toa ) is the

atom i c extens ion ,whil e “

absolute largeness (parama

maha ttva ) i s possessed by ether, etc . The author of th e

trea tise understands maha t of ether , etc .,in

parama -maha t in P r . E h. by parimanda lya ,and ca l l s i t

sarva -ga ta , e tc . vibhu ) .

The author has fa i l ed to m en ti on the extensi on of m ind

and has caused d iff eren t op in ion s among la ter corn

men ta tors . But the treat i se a sserts tha t th e substances

hav ing absolute la rgen ess a re on ly four, and the substances

ha v ing Spher ic i ty are the four atom s as wel l as th e other

1 O n 2 , 2 , 1 1 .

2 S ome translators use th ings cont iguous to void

D A S A P A D A R TH I ; NOTES , 1 . 3 : ATTR IBUTE 1 49

five substances as causes .1 Consequen tly m ind i s included

in spheri c i ty , and i s o f “absolute m inuteness The

author’

s unders tand ing of e ther as Spher ic ity i s probably

due to i ts spher ica l appearan ce,and the o ther three

substances fol low the ana l ogy of ether .

I ndividua lity (p . 95 )

Ind i v idua l i ty (prthaktva ) i s treated l ik e number in

V .S . and in P r . E h. T he latter d efines i t as apoddhdra

vya vahd ra-kd ra na 2 The d iff erence betw een number and

ind iv idua l i ty i s tha t th e ' former i s syn theti ca l,wh i l e the

la tter i s ana lytica l ; but they d epend upon each other .

Ind i v idua l i ty as an attr ibute has no ind i vidua l i ty in

i tse l f. Consequently there i s no ind iv idua l i ty in t w o

things , j us t a s un i ty does no t e x ist betw een two th ings .

By these doct rines the V a iSesik a rej ects th e sa t-kd rya -vd da

o f the S amk hya a nd the V edan ta .

3 S ee V .S . 7 ,2

, 7—8

7 ,2, 1 3 .

Conj un ction and Disj un ction (pp . 95 — 6)

T he be fore-mentioned a ttr ibutes are sta tic,wh i le these

t w o are ra ther dynam ica l and are th e importan t fa ctors in

the system . V .S .

4 does not g ive exact d efin i t i on s of them .

P r . E h. defines conj unct ion samyukta -pra tyaya -n im itta ,

and aprdp tayoh prdp tih, and d isj unction vibhakta

pra tyaya-n imitta

,and prdp ti

-purvikd aprap tih.

5

T he defin i tions in the treat i se exactly agree w i th the

la tter parts o f the defin i tions in P r . E h. K w h é i-c i says

tha t conjunction cons ists in the beginn ing of the con

j unction between two separa te th ings .

1 Ch . ii, 1 , 5 .

2 p . 138,

T he cause of the express ion o f separa teness .

3 P ro fessor Garbe , S d ziikhya -P hilosophie , pp . 228—233 .

‘1 7, 2 , 94 10.

3pp. 139 , 15 1 ,

“ Tha t which causes the cogni t ion o f the conj unc t , andthe conjo ining o f t w o separa ted th ings w i t h each o ther, ” and Tha twh ich causes the cogni t ion o f the d is junc t , and the separa t ion o f

formerly conjo ined t h ings from each other ” .

1 5 0 V A I S E S IK A P HIL OS OPHY

Conjunct ion i s o f three sorts , auya tara-karma-j a ,

ubhaya-karma -j a ,

and samyoga—j a . K w hei-c i i l lustra tes

the first sort as occurring in the case of beating a drum

w ith a hand , and the second sort in the ca se of clapping

the hands. The defin it ion of the th i rd sort may a l so be

tran slated “ th e conjunct ion produced by conjunction

is tha t in which many inactive substances conj o in with

ether,etc . , when produced (by the conjunct i on of the

componen t K w hei-c i expla in s tha t “ th e

conj unction produced by conjunction i s th e conjunction of

young shoots,etc ., wh ich are inact i v e

,with the s ubstances

e ther,etc. , when they are sprout ing “

P r. E h. says ,“samyogajas tu utpannamatrasya

-e va ci ra-utpannasya

va nisk riyasya karana-samyogibhir ak aranaih karana

akarana-samyoga purvak ah k arya ak arya-gatah sam

yogah.

” 1 “ E ther in the trea ti se and K w hei-c i ’ s

explanation corresponds to aha‘

rana and akarya ,and

an inacti ve th ing,wh i ch cons i sts o f many substances

( or many inactive substances)”

and “ young shoots ”

to

u tpann amd tra eva cira -u tpann o ed n iskriyah. The

whole m ean ing i s tha t when th ings,whi ch are in con tact

w ith e ther,produce another th ing by conj un cti on w ith

other th ings,a conj unct ion aga in takes place betw een

the product and ether . This la st conjunction i s th e effect

of the formerconjunct ion .

Disjunction may be understood by the ana logy of

conjunction .

Conjun ction i s poss ible betw een separate th ings ; butinherence is the relat ion between unsepara ted th ings

,and

disjunc t ion takes place a fter conjunction has taken place .The theori es of conjunct ion and d isjunct ion a l so support

the asa t-kc‘

tryd-vd da

,wh ich i s the n ecessary consequence

o f the theory of aggrega t ion and of the ana lyt i ca l

Observa tion of the S ix categori es . Causa l i ty in the

system has, l ik e tha t in the S arvasti-vada,a wider

1 p . 139 .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 5 2 V A I S E S I K A PHIL OS O PHY

Cogn ition ( p . 97)

Cogn it ion (buddhi) i s one of the most important fa ctors

in the system,because most parts of the system depend on

in ference . T he relat ion betw een cogn i t i on and obj ects

has been expla ined . I f se l f as se l f-consc iousness i s looked

upon as the innermost subj ect,cogn ition becomes obj ect i ve

but,i f cogn it ion

'

i s subj ecti ve , sel f may be obj ect i ve , as

stated in the proof o f sel f (3 ,2

,

T he defin i t ion of cogn i t ion i s found on ly in the treat i se .

Cogn ition in V .S . i s d iv ided in to two sorts,perception

(p ra tgaksa ) and in ference The latter i s

ca l led la ing ika in V .S . These two sorts of cogn i tion are

th e pramana s , and the system does not acknowledge

other sorts of pramana l ike s’

abda ,etc ., because s

’

abda ,

etc .,are included in in feren ce .

1

P ercept ion in V .S . i s o f t w o sorts,laukika and a laukika .

T he term pra tyaksa i s used for the sensory cogn i t i ons

from the fi ve sense-organ s ; but i t i s somet imes used for

the v isua l sensa t ion on ly,

2 because the v i sua l sensation

i s typ ica l o f the sensory cogn i ti on s . I n th i s sense

pra tyaksa i s a lmost the same as ckrsta ,caksusa ,

and

upa labdhi .3 I n the term inology of V .S . the term

upa labdhi i s l im i ted to v isua l cogn i t i on ; accord ingly

P r. Bh. i s not correct when i t a sserts tha t buddhi, j nan a ,

p ra tyaya ,and upa labdhi are synonymous (paryaya ) .

The cond itions and poss ibi l i ty of perception of the n ine

substances,etc .

,w il l be ful ly expla ined in chapter

~

i i .

A laukika -pra tya ksa i s m en ti on ed in V .S . 9 , 1 , 1 1— 1 5

and in P r . E h. ,p . 1 87, but i t i s Om i tted in th e trea t i se .

K w hei-c i expla ins that accord ing to the V a iSesik a

doctr ine the eyes have l ight, and ,when a man faces

1 9 , 2 , 3 P r . E h. , pp . 2 13—230.

2 16 ; 8 , l , 2 , e tc .

3 4 , l , 1 1 ; c f 4 , —16 ; 6 , e tc .

3 p . 171 . Th is is an infl uence o f N . S . on P r. E h. .N . S . 1 , l , 15 says ,buddhir upalabdhir jfianam ity anarthan taram .

”

DA S A P A DA R TH I ; NOTES,1 . 3 : ATTR IBUTE

coloured obj ects,the l ight rea ches to the colour of the

obj ects and he can perce i ve i t,just as a lamp Sh ines upon

th ings . S ound , sm el l , and taste come to and touch th e

sen se-organs respecti vely ,and they are perce i ved . When

a bel l is sounded in the d istance , i ts sound i s heard a fter

a l i ttl e wh i l e . Th is proves that sound come s to the ear

The explanat ion i s con fused w i th the Nyaya th eory but

th e other part i s perhaps correc t .

The cogn i tions of substan ces suppose (ap eksa) th e

substance , attr ibutes , and a ct ions,and those of a ttri

butes and action s ha ve necessar i ly th e substan ces a s

the ir causes accord ingly,th e cogn i t ion s of a ttr ibutes and

acti on s do not suppose attr ibutes and a ctions ; attributes

and a ct ions have in th em sel ves no a ttri butes and a ction s .1

When we look a t a wh i te th ing,the cogn i tion of th e

whi te th ing resul ts from the wh iteness of its substratum ,

and from th e cogn i t ion of wh i teness .2 There fore th e fi rst

impress ion i s on ly “ the wh i te th ing w ithout the d i s

tinction between wh i ten ess and a th ing. N ext the fi rst

impress ion i s ana lysed in to the con cepts, the attr ibute ,

whiten ess,and the substance

,a th ing

,and a ssumes th e

form,

“ th i s th ing i s wh i te .” Between the wh i te th ing

and i ts fi rst impress ion,and between the first impressi on

and the concepts,there are causa l re la tion s . T h i s first

impression corre sponds to n irvika lpaka-pra tyaksa ( th e

perception w i thout conception ) and th e ana lysed concepts

to savika lpaka-pra tyaksa ( th e perception w i th concep

t i on ) . The la tter i s ca l l ed buddhy-apeksa and expressed

by the words ayam ( th i s) , esa ( th i s) , tvayd hr ta (done

by th ee ) , and bhoj aya enam ( feed him) , etc .3 Though th i s

second sort i s th e ind irect cogn i t i on of th e immed ia te

exper ien ce , i t i s included in th e perception . The fi rst sort

o f percept ion i s expla ined in th e first section (dhn ika ) o f

1 5 4 V A I S E S IK A PH ILOSOPHY

the e ighth chapter (adhyd ya ) , wh i l e the second sort i s inthe second secti on .

1

Thus all the ana lysed concepts resul t from immed ia te

exper iences . They are con veyed to fel low-creatures and

a cknowl edged among them as represen t ing defin i te th ings .A nd they are handed down from genera tion to genera tion .

Thi s i s an importan t theory of the system . I n th i s

connection a ll cogn i tions are empi r i ca l on the one hand,

and some of them are innate on the other . But there i s

no entire ly transcendent cogn i t ion . O ur concepts , wh ich

appear to be inborn,presuppose the exper iences o f form er

gen era t ions . The V eda,which i s l ook ed upon by the

Mimamsa as re vela tion , comes from the exper ien ces of

anc ien t sages (rsi) and i s consequen tly ca l l ed buddhi

p i‘

trud . The author ity of the V eda i s just th e same a s

tha t o f som e of our concepts wh ich are authorita ti ve in

da i ly l i fe . A nd wha t i s Sta ted in th e V eda has a corre

spond ing en t i ty ,just as our concept has i t. From th e

emp ir ica l standpoin t comes the dogma tha t,where there

i s cogn i tion , there i s natura l ly the correspond ing en t i ty .

The defin i t ion of perception in the trea ti se i s a genera l

one .

“ The sensory representa t ion corresponds to the

firs t impress ion,inc lud ing the ana lysed concepts .

2

A pprec iabl e substance s corresponds to anek a-dra vya

sama vayat rupa-viSesac ca ( I'

I'

Ipa-upa labd and i s from

ternary a tom i c compounds upwa rds . Colour and so on ,

res id ing in appreciable substances , i s a rtha,one o f

1 I n the Nyaya the first s tage of percept ion is regarded as the on lypercept ion . ind riya

-artha-sannik arsa-utpannarii jfianam avy

apad eéyam avyabhicari vyavasaya-atmak am pratyak sam

”

( l , l , I fpercept ion is a vgapad es‘ya ,

the second sort cannot be a sort o f percept ion .

T he second sort of percept ion re la t es t o upamd na and s’

abda . A nd the

es tabl ishmen t of up amd na and a part o f sa bda depend s upon the theoryt ha t concep ts and the correspond ing objec t s have no connec t ion (2 , 1 ,

2 S ee P r. E h. , p . 186 .

3 V . S . 4 , 1 , 8 ,“ P ercept ion o f colour is consequen t on inhes ion O f

subs tances more t han One , a nd on part ic ularity o f c o lour. ” 1V . S . 3 , I , 36

is exac t ly the same as th is .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 5 6 V A I S E S I K A PH ILOSOPHY

from some parts , w h ich can be s een,to the whole . The

process of the reason ing is fi rst,one sees the character isti c

pa rts , i.e . the mark then he reco l lects th e obj ect,

which has the parts,a nd th e conn ect ion of the parts w i th

the obj ect. T he contact o f sel f with m ind i s natura l ly

presen t through the process . Fina l ly he concludes tha t

tha t i s th e obj ect, a l though not all the pa rts of i t are

perce i vabl e at the t ime . Thi s rea son ing i s a l so appl i ed

to tha t from one th ing to another of the sam e cla ss . The

defin i tion i s perhaps more appropriate to the la tter case .

The second k ind of in ference i s more logi ca l and im

portan t. I t i s the reason ing from one th ing (a rtha -an tara )to another (artha -an tenn a) .

V .S . says , “a sya idamkaryamkaranamsamyogi virodhi

samavay i ca-i ti la ingik am,

” 1samyogi samavayy

-ek artha

samavay i virodhi ca,

”and “

a sya i dam karya-karana

sambandhas ca a vayavad bhava ti”

.

2 [ da m lcc'

i/ryam,

lcdranam, etc . , are th e conclus ions of the reason ing and

t echn ica l ly ca l l ed “

pra iij fi d ( thesi s) in N .S . ,and a sya

indi cates hetu ( the rea son ) wh ich is synonymous wi th

apa des'

d,linga , pramdna ,

and karana in V .S .

3

I dcm’

t lcdryam i s reason ing from cause to effect,

e .g .,from ex i stence o f th e cause i s ex i stence of th e

effect,

and “ from non-ex i stence of cause is non-ex i stence

of effect 4

[ dam lcdra nam i s rea son ing from effect to cause,

e .g .,the effect of a cause i s the mark of the exi stence

1 9,2, 1 ,

“ In ferent ia l cogn it ion is t ha t one t h ing is the eff ec t or

cause of, conjunct w ith , repugnant to , or inheren t in ,

another. T he

Ca nd ra -kd nta -bhd sya remark s, ek a-artha-samavayi ca-it i ca-arthah .

2 3 , 1 , 9 ,“ T he conjunc t , the inherent , the inherent in one [and the

same] th ing , and the contrad ic t ory (are means of and 9 , 2 , 2 ,

Tha t one t h ing belongs t o ano ther,the connex ion o f cause and effec t ,

arises from a port ion .

”V at syayana , commen t ing on N . S . 3 , 2 , 44 ,

quote s V . S . 3 , l , 9 , and g ives examples for each case. T he example o f

virodhi is the quotat ion of V . S . 3 , 1 , 12.

3 9 , 2 , 4 .

4 4 , l , 3 , “ karana-bhavat karya-bhavah, and l , 2 , l , “ karanaabhavat karya-abhavah .

”

D A S A P A DA R TH I ; NOTES , 1 . 3 : ATTR IBUTE 1 5 7

of the cause,

and “an a ttribute o f an effect i s observed

to be preceded by an attribute of the cause 1

[ dam sandy/0973 and samavdyi are reason ing from

santyukta and sama veta to samyogin and sama vd yin ,

e .g . ( the cogn ition ) of that wh i ch possesses conjunct ion

( resul ts from k nowledge of the conjunct, e .g . ) from a staff ;and ( the cogn i tion ) of that wh i ch possesses inhes ion

( resul ts) from the part i cular mark .

2

I dam eka -artha-samavdyi i s reason ing from one th ing

to another,both of wh ich reside in th e sam e substance

,

e .g . one effect i s (a mark o f the ex istence ) of another

effect.3

The before-mentioned fi ve sorts are a l together a ffirmat ive

and correspond to Barbara. in the A r istotel ian logi c .

[ dam virodhi is rea son ing between two contrad ictory

th ings . Th is i s expla ined as “a non -ex i stent con trad ictory

( i s a mark ) of the ex i sten t”

,

“ that wh ich is actua l ( i s

l 4,l , 2 ,

“ tasya karyaml ingam,

”and 2, 1 , 24 ,

“ karana-guna-pfirvak ahkarya-guno drs tah.

”S ee 1 , 2 , 2 , na tu karya-abhavat karana

abhavah f’

A ccord ing to the rule of logic the 8mm 4,1,3 seems t o be contrad ic tory

to sz‘

d ra s l , 2, l l , 2 , 2 ; 2 , l , 24 , and 4,l,2. T he rule tel ls us , if

“ karana-bharat karya-bhavah is correc t , on ly “ karya-abhavat karanaabhavah can logica lly be in ferred , wh i le “

.karana-abhavat karyaabhavah and “ karya-bhavat karana-bhavah ( i. e . t asya karyamlingam)are not logica l ly correc t . T he reason is t hat “

the necessary rela t ionsbetween the anteceden t and the consequence in a hypothet ica l propos it ionare only twofold : from a ffirmat ion o f the antecedent t o a ffirma t iono f the consequence, and from nega t ion of the consequence to negat ion of

the an tecedent . T he former is t he express mean ing o f the propos i t ionaccord ingly the la t ter is the on ly logica l ly poss ible reason ing . T he

o ther t w o ways , from nega t ion o f the anteced ent to nega t ion o f the

consequence , and from a ffirma t ion o f the consequence t o a ffirma t ion o f

the an teceden t , are not logica l ly va l id But 4 , l , 3 is s ta ted from t he

s tandpoint o f fac t ( i. s . R ealgrund ) , wh ile the o ther four s lum s are fromthe s tandpo in t of reason ing ( i. e . E rk enn tnissgrund ) . I n the formerca se the cause is the firs t princ iple in produc ing effec ts , but in the

la t ter case the cause is the las t princ iple t o be ’

k nown by us . Con

sequen t ly they are no t contrad ic t ory t o each o ther ; t hey are s ta ted fromd i fferen t poin t s o f view . S uch is an usua l case in V . S .

2 7, 2 , 19, samyog ino d andat samavayino v isesac ca .

3 3 , l , 10, karyamkarya-antarasya .

”

1 5 8 V A I S E S I K A PH IL OS O PHY

a mark ) o f tha t wh ich i s not actua l,

and that wh i ch

i s actua l ( is a mark o f someth ing repugnan t) wh ich i s

a ctua l ” .

1 A nd in 2,1,2 5 —6 ; 1 0, 1 , 2—6 . Th i s is a negative

case and corresponds to Cesare.

[ dam karyam, etc .,are in rela tion to a sya ; conse

quen tly these s i x sorts represent the ca ses and cond i tions

of heta .

[ dam ka ryam i s the sam e as the fi rst explana tion of

parvara t in the N yaya -blui sya ; idam lcd ranam i s th e

same as the fi rst explanation of s’

esava t , and idamsamavagj i i s the sam e as samd nya to drsta in th e second

explanati on . S dmd nya to d jrs ta in the first explana tion

and paroa va t in the second explanation sometimes agree

wi th idam fairy/am and c ra zzam,and sometimes w ith

idam samavd yi.2 [ dam virodhi has an equ i valen t in

N S . 1 , 1 , 35 and 37, wh i l e idam samyogi and ekd rtha

sama vd yi are not clearly sta ted in N .S .

S esa va t in the second explana t ion of V atsyayana i s

a specia l case of idam virodhi. Th i s i s used in V .S . 2, 1 ,

and N S . 3,2 ,4 2 . P r. uses th i s mode of proof

thrice,

3 but in th e la tter three work s i t i s named paris’

esa .

V .S . 2 , 2 ,l,i s a l so a case of th i s s

’

esava t , and i s th e method

of res idue in M i l l’s term inology .

Indian logic in gen era l i s not pure rea son ing or In ference ,but is proof and accord ingly m ethodologi ca l . I n V .S . as

wel l as N S . the reason ing i s a lso proof . The proof in the

former i s more conceptua l than in the latter , and seems to

be more ad vanced .

A sya idamka ryam,etc . , conta in two or three importan t

relat ion s. I damis th e subj ect of the pra tij fia (dharm in ,

a numeya ,visesya ) , and karyam,

etc . , are the pred icates

(dharma,lingin ,

vyap aka ,visesa

, gamya ) .4 A sya ind ica te

1 3 , l , 1 1 , “v irOd hy a bhfi tambhfi ta sya

“ bhutam abhutasya

and 3 , l , 13 , “ bhuto bhutasya .

”

2 S ee the In trod uc t ion .

3 pp. 5 8 , 69 , 288.

4 S loka -vartt ika , A numdna -pa riccheda ,sl . 2—16 .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 60 V A I S E S I K A P H IL OSOPHY

K w hé i-c i expla ins : “ the fi rst sort is reason ing in

wh ich the maj or term , i.e . the pred i ca te of the pra tij fi d ,

i s a scerta ined by see ing an uncon trad ictory property,

e .g . fire i s proved by see ing smoke . The second sort i s

that in wh ich the maj or term i s concluded from see ing a

con trad ictory property , e .g . the break ing of r i ce-plants i s

inferred from see ing ha i l,and ha i l i s proved by see ing

the break ing of ri ce-plan ts .” The explanat ion probably

depends upon eh. i i,2, 5 , but

“an uncontrad ictory

property ”as t he explanation of “

a common property

is too w ide,and “

a contrad icto ry property ”

is too

narrow and cannot properly expla in the second sort .

Candra-kanta d ifferen tly expla in s the reason ing in V .S .,

and classifies i t under t w o sorts,vis

’

esa to drsta and

sai itan ya to drsta} But th e classifica tion i s not suffici en tly

comprehens i ve .

A s for fa l laci es , V .S . mention s them in 3 ,1,1 5 — 1 7 and

3,1, 1 but the trea t i se does not a l lude to them .

P leasure and P a in ( p . 97)

V .S . says,i sta -an ista-karana-visesad virodhac ca m i thab

sukha-duhkhayor artha-anta ra and P r. E h.

defin es them “anugraha

-lak sanamsuk ham”

and “upaghata ;

lak sanar’

n duhk har'

n"

P l ea sure ( su/cha ) and pa in (du ll kha )are produced by con tact of the four factors , just as in

th e production of cogn i t i on 5a ccord ingly

,V .S . 1 0

,1,2— 7

proves tha t/pleasure and pa in a re som eth ing d i fferent

from cogn i tion . P l ea sure and pa in belO ng to emotion ,

w hile'

cognit ion i s in tel l ect and effort i s vol i tion .

1 p . 48 .

2 S ee Ca ndra -d a-bhd sya .

3 10 , l , l , Inasmuch as the causes o f the des irable and the undes irableare d i fferen t and Opposed , the rela t ion of pleasure and pa in is t ha t o frec iproca l ly d ifferen t objec t s .

”

4 pp. 25 9—60, T he charac teris t ic o f pleasure is sa t isfact ion and the

charac t eris t ic o f pa in is su ffering5 5

,2 , 15 .

D A S A P A DA R TH I ; NOTE S , I . 3 : A TTR IBUTE 1 6 1

Desire and A version (p . 97)

Desire ( iccha) and a vers ion (dvesa ) ar i s e from pl easure

and pa in ,and through

‘

adpsta or j ati-vis'

esa (particula rity

o f race) .1 They are der i vat ive ; pleasure and pa in are

passi v e , wh i l e des ire and a vers ion , caused by pleasure

and pa in ,are a ct i ve . Con sequen tly

,desire and a versi on

cause transm igration . P r . E h. defines them , svartham

parartham V a’

pralpta-prarthana

-I ccha”

and “

praj valanaatmak o d vesah,

yasm in sa ti praj va litam iva-atmanam

manya t e sa dvesah”

.

2

Efiort (p . 97)

V .S . does not defin e e ff ort (praya tna ) , but eff ort i s th e

cause of actions phys ica l and menta l . I n som e cases

effort i s produced uncon sc iously. P r. E h. d i v ides it into

two sorts, j ivana -parvaka (unconsc i ous) and icehd -dvesa

p i‘

w vaka ( conscious ) .3 K w h é i—c i expla in s

,where there

occurs an action to do som eth ing,there i s a vol i tion

(a tsd ha ) preced ing the action . Th is i s eff ort." The

defin i t ion in th is passage does not c learly m ent ion th e

un con scious e ff ort,but the n ext chapter a l ludes to it .

The before ment ioned se venteen a ttributes are

enumerated in V .S . a s a ttributes, and th e last six are

the spec ia l attr ibutes o f sel f not common to any other

substances .Gravity (pp . 97—8)

The fol low ing seven a ttr i butes are added by P r . E h. to

the se v en teen . Grav i ty (guru tua ) is ment ioned in P r . E h.

as“ j a la-bhumyoh patana-k arma-karanam Th is agrees

1 6 , 2 , 10—13.

2 pp . 26 1-2, Des ire is the w ish ing forsomet h ing not obta ined ,ei ther

for one’s ow n sake or for the sake o f ano ther,” and A version is o f the

nature o f heart -burn ing or irritat ion . I t is the feeling t ha t makes onet h ink h imsel f burning or being irrita ted ”

(Ganga-natha J ha’

s transla t ion ) .

3 p. 263.

p . 263,“(Gravity is ) the cause of the act ion fa ll ing of wa ter and

earth .

1 6 2 V A I S E S I K A PH I L OSOPHY

w ith V .S . 5,1,7 ; 5 ,

1,1 8 ; 5 ,

2,3 . But V .S . 1 , 1 , 29

a scri bes to grav ity causa t ion of the a ction throwing

upw ards . P r . E h. fol lows.

th i s sutra in the explanationof the a ct ion ; but our treat i se does not men tion i t .Gra v i ty i s , i f there i s no impression ( samskara ) and con

junction, the cause of fa l l ing down ; - accord ingl y

,grav ity

can be the absolute cause (an ap eksa kara na ) of con

junction and d isjun ct ion . This i s con trad ictory to the

essen t ia l nature of a ttr ibutes ( 1 ,1,

Flu idity and V iscid ity (p . 98)

P r . E h. expla ins,

“ dra vatva-syandana-karma-k aranam

,

tr i-dra vya-vrt ti, tat tu d vividham samsiddhik am nai

mittik a fi ca , samsiddhik ama pamviéesa-gunah,naimit tik am

prt liivi t ej asoh S amanya-gunah.

” 1 A ccord ing to V .S .

fluid ity (dra va tt’

a ) is possessed by wa ter , and the cause

o f flowing ( syanda ) .2 Fluidity ex ists in butter , lac ,

w ax,

tin,l ead

,i ron , si l ver , and gold , through the i r\ conjuncti on

with fire .

3

Con cern ing v i sc id i ty ( sn eha ) V .S . says,

apo dravah

snigdhah,

” 4and there i s no further a l lusion to it . P r. E h.

defines i t sneho’

pam vis’

esa-gunah samgraha-mrjadihetuh 5 The defin i t ions in our treati se a re deri v ed from

P r . E h. But fluid ity and v i scid ity are not a ttr i butes in

the strict sen se .

I mpression (p . 98 )

Impress ion ( samskara ) in V .S . may be d i v i ded in to t w o

sorts ; accord ing to 9 ,2,6—8 and 9 ,

2,10 , impression i s

a cause of rem in iscen ce (smrti) , dream ing ( svapna ) ,1 p . 264 , F lu id ity is the cause o f the ac t ion fl owing and ex is t s in the

t hre e subs tances . But it is (d ivided in to ) t w o sort s , in trins ic and

ex trins ic . T he former is a spec ific a t tribut e of wa ter,wh i le the la t t er

is a common a t tribu te t o both earth and fire .

”

2 2 , 5 , 2 , 4 .

3 2 , 1 , 6-7.

4 2,1,2 .

5 p . 266 , V isc id ity is a spec ific a t tribute of wa ter and the cause of

cohesion , smoot hness , e t c .

”

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 6 4 V A I S E S I K A P H IL OS OPHY

translat ion of kriyd -hetu ,or it may be tha t of krti-heta

but lcr ti is more menta l than physica l .1 Impul s ion,etc .

,

i s l i tera l ly str ik ing , or throw ing, etc . and i s the transla

t ion of n odan a , and etc.” includes abhighd ta ( impact )and “

samyu lcta -samyoga (conjunction with the conjunct)“ Impetus

,or phys ica l en ergy ”

is the equ i va l en t of vega .

The corporea l substances ”

are fi v e : earth ,water

,fire

w ind ,and m ind . H as one substance as i ts substratum

s ta tes the essen t ia l nature of a ct ions ( 1 , 1 ,Impetus (vega ) i s dynam i c , whi l e elasti c i ty ( sthiti

s tha'

paka ) i s rather stat i c ( inertia ) . The latter i s not

clearl y set out in

,

V .S .,and e v en P r. E h. does not a l lude

to i t in other passages ; 3 but impetus ( seven t imes) and

m en ta l impression (bhavana) (fi v e tim es ) are m en tioned3

in other passages. The trea ti se refers to elastic i ty in the

e xplanat ion of a ct ions .

Merit and Dem erit (p . 98 )

I n P r . E h. adrsta has the sam e mean ing as mer it

(dharma ) and dem er i t (adharma ) , because the se v enadd it iona l attr ibutes are enumera ted as guru tua , drava tva ,

sn eha,samskara

,adrsta ,

and s’

a bda .

4 I n V .S . ad/rs o

ta is

m en tion ed in 5,1,1 5 ; 5 , 2 ,

2 ; 5 ,2, 7 ; 5 ,

2,1 3 ; 5 ,

2, 1 7— 1 8 ;

6 ,2

,2 6

,2,13 . The first four or fi ve sa tra s describe it as

an obj ect i ve force,and the last three treat it as subj ect i v e ;

but even the first four may a l so be expla ined subj ect i vely

a ccord ingly,a drsta i s considered as the la ten t energy

res id ing in sel f and the fina l cause of transm igra t ion,

because i t i s stated , tad-abhav e samyoga-abhavo’

pradur

bhavas ca mok sah,

” 5and t

‘

a d i s undoubted ly adrsta .

1 N yaya -kosa ,pp. 733—4 , 2 1 1 , 5 23. P r. Bh. d is t inc t ly ca l ls impetus

one of kriyd-hetus (p. S ee notes on oh . if , 2, 9.

2 5 , 2 , 1 5 , 2 , 6 .

3 pp. 95 —102 .

4 p . 10,“adrsta-s

’

abdena d harma-adharmayor upasamgrahah (N ydya

kanda li ) .5 5 , 2 , 18 , Where t here is non-ex istence of th is ( that is , of d est iny ) ,

t here,

is non-ex istence of con junc t ion a nd non-ex is tence of mani fe s tat ion ,

em ancipat ion .

”

D A S A P A DA R TH I ; NOTE S , 1 . 3 : ATTR IBUTE 1 6 5

A drsta i s v ery sim i la r to impression ( samskara ) , wh ichas

“the cause of rem in i scen ce i s partly co incid ent

w ith i t ; but impression i s ra ther m echan i ca l and m en ta l ,wh i le adrsta i s mora l and re l igious . A drsta principa l ly

m ean s a la tent force resul t ing from the acti on s in th e

pre v ious l i fe and cont inuing to ex ist in th e presen t

l i fe . Th is adrsta causes the first a ct ion of the na tura l

phenomena,as expla ined in ch . i i , 3 . T he theory of adrs ta

i s very l ike ly to lead to the conclusion tha t the sphere of

tran sm i gra t ion i s the common resu l t of the ind i v i dua l

adrsta ,and e veryone

’s body and other persona l c i rcum

stances are th e spec ia l resu l ts of the ind iv idua l adrata .

Thi s i s a genera l idea in Buddh i sm .

But adrsta i s not the ad/rsgfa of God in V .S J God i s

not m en tion ed in V .S . ,though the Upa skara and th e

V ivr ti ma in ta in that V .S . acknowl edges the ex i stence o f

God . Thei r explanat ions w i l l be exam ined .

The comm en ta tors expla in tha t th e sa tra s samjna

k a rma t v-asmad -v iéistanam l ingam and “

pratyak sa

pra vrt tat vat samj na-k armanah” 1

are th e proof of th e

ex i stence of God . But th i s is hardly possi bl e , because an

importan t d iscuss ion l i ke the proof of God shoul d be found

in its proper place the author of the sa tra d iscusses the

proof of se l f in th e whol e th ird adhyd ya . The two

si‘

t tras are rea l ly the author ’s an swer to an opponen t

( 2 , 1 ,1 5 The author proves the ex isten ce , the

in v i s ibi l ity,the substan tia l i ty

,the

,

e tern i ty ,and th e

mul tip l ic ity of w ind in 2, 1 , 9— 1 4 . Then an

'

opponent

says,Vayu-S ann ik arse pra tyak sa-abhavad drstam l iI

’

Igam

na v idya te ,”

samanyato drstac ca -a viSesah,and tasmad

agamik am” 2(2, 1 , 1 5 T he author answers the

1 2 , 1 , 18—19 , But word and work are the mark o f those beings w ho

are d is t inguished from ourselves , ” and“ because word s and work s are

k nown by percept ion t o be produced2 Inasmuch as in the cont ac t w ith w ind there is no ac t o f percept ion ,

t here exist s ( in it ) no vis ible mark ,

”and (even ) by genera l in ference it

is not a part icular and “ it is t herefore proved by reve la t ion( the

1 66 V A I S E S IK A PH ILOS OPHY

obj ect ion s in the two sa tra s . The sa fras mean that som e

o f our con cepts ha v e thei r origin in the perceptions o f

form er genera t ion s and ha ve been ' handed down to us .

A nd they are th e logica l ground for the proof o f the

correspond ing obj ects and the crit er ion of our a ctions .1

The abo ve explana tion wi l l be a l so proved by 3 ,2 ,

The author proves the ex istence , th e substan t ia l i ty and

etern i ty of sel f in 3 ,2

,4— 5

,and the obj ect i on s are ra i sed

I n 3,2

,6 1 11 a lmost the same words a s in 2 ,

1,1 5 — 1 7 .

S a tra 3,2, 9 i s th e author

’

s answer to the obj ection s, jus t

a s sa fra s 2,1,1 8— 1 9 are to sa fra s 2

,1,1 5 — 1 7. If S a tra s

3,2,6—8 are the obj ect i ons

,as the commen tators expla in

,

sfi tras 2,1 , 1 5 —1 7 must be obj ect ion s

,because the words

and the’ l ine of a rgum en t are the sam e ; then sa tras

2,1,1 8— 1 9 must be the answer to them . They cannot be

the proof of God . A nd other sz‘

ctras ha v e no t race of the

proof of God ; therefore it i s con cluded tha t V .S . does

not a cknowledge the exi sten ce of God . P r . E h. f or the

firs t t ime acknowledged Brahma saka la-bhuvana-pat i r

maheSvarah and Brahma sarva l oka pitamahah

But th i s is an influence from a the i st i c system .

4

Meri t (dharma ) and dem eri t (adharma ) are m en tion ed

in V .S . ( 6 ,2

, 6 ,2,1 4— 1 5 ; 9 ,

2, 9 ; 9 ,

2,1 3

,and 1

,1,1

1,1,4 . I f S i

‘

t tra s 6 ,2

,1 4— 1 5

,

“iccha-d vesa-purvika dharma

adharma-pravrttih,ta t samyogo v ibhagah,

” 5are compared

wi th sa tra 6 ,2,1 2

,

“adrstac ca ( raga-dvesau ,

i.e . iccha

m eri t and dem eri t are seen to be res idua l

1 Cf . 6 , 1 , 2 ; 4 , 2 , 9 ; 4 , 2 , 1 1 ; 5 , 2 , 10 ; 1, e tc . S ee Ca nd ra

kdnta -bhdsya on the s fitra s.

2 3 , 2 , 6 runs “ yajna d a t t a it i sann ik arse pra tyak sa-abhavad d rs ta

l ingamna vidya te , 3 , 2 , 7 samanvat o d rstac ca-avisesah ,and 3, 2 , 8

t asmad fig am ikahpp . 4 8—9 , and see the beg inn ing and the end of P r. E h.

S ap ta-pad artl n, parama tma is vara ek a eva .

L a ksond va l i , sa (atma) d v iv idhah iévara-aniévara-bhedat .

Hand t , loc . c it . , p . 26 .

5 T a t-sarhyoga”means a fter a ll samsara and “

tad-v ibhaga is

mok sa”

. Cf . t he ne x t szZtra ,

“atma k armasu mok so vyakhyatah.

”

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 68 V A I S E S I K A PH ILOS OPHY

wi th the acti v i ty and th e cessat ion of m er it in P r. E h.,

but the trea t i se expla ins them t oo conc i sely .

A cti v i ty ”in the trea t i se i s the t ran sla tion of pravrtti .

A des i rabl e body , e tc. ,i s the resul t o f m eri t and happy

conditions in th e deva and the ma nu sya-loka .

“ A ct i v i ty

destroys one substance by i ts effect i s expla ined by the

commen tators as fol lows : A fter a man has got rid o f

the presen t body and cond i tions,he can obta in owing

to the act i v i ty of m eri t , a happy body and cond i t ion in

the n ext l i fe . O ne substance i s the body in the presen t

l i fe,and i ts effect i s a happy and des i rable body in the

n ext l i fe . Both are con tra ry and do not ex i st a t the sam e

t ime . P r. E h. says,dha rmah purusa

-gunah kartubpriya-hi ta-mok sa-he tuh at indriyo

’

ntya-sukha-samvijnanav irodhi 1

( th i s refers to thetwo sort s of m eri t ,priya -hita

to pra vrtti and mokea to n ivrtti) . By the help of the

comm enta tors and P r. E h. the defin i tion in the t rea t i se

may be understood . K w hé i-c i expla in s tha t “acti v i ty is

t he cause of obta in ing a des i rable body ,tha t i s

,the cause

of an excel l ent body in the cycl e of tran sm igra ti on ”

.

Cessa tion ” i s n ivrtti . “ Del ight in perfect cogn i ti on,

wh ich i s free from a ttachmen t can be understood by the

help of P r. E h.,

utpannasya sat-padartha-tattva

jnanasya-ajnana -nivrttau v irak tasya raga-dvesady-abhavat

taj -jayor dharma-adharmayor anutpa t tau purva-samc i

tayos ca-upabhogan n irodhe santosa-sukham s’

a rira-par i

k hedar'

n (or paricchedam) ca utpadya ragadi n ivrttau

n ivrt t i-lak sanah k evalo dha rmah paramartha-dars'

ana-jarh

suk ham k rtva n ivartate , tad-a n irodhan n irbij asya -atmanah

Sariradi-nivrtt ih punar-anutpa t tau mok sa iti.” 2

1 pp. 272-82 , M eri t is an a t tribute of man (i. e . se l f ) it brings abou tt o t he agen t happiness , good ,

and emanc ipa t ion it is supersensuousit is des truc t ible by the experienc ing of the last i tem o f pleasure .

”

2 pp . 281—2 , H e ob tains ( from the t eacher) the true k nowledge o f the sixc a tegories , wh ich removes h is ignoranc e t hen having acquired thoroughd ispass ion he becomes free from al l a ffec t ions , avers ions , and o t her suchl ike fee l ings and the absence of t hese put s a s tep t o the prod uc t ion o f

DA S A P A D A R TH I ; NOTES , 1 . 3 : ATTR IBUTE 1 69

A s for dem eri t P r . E h. says , adharmo’

py-atma-gunah

k artur ahita-pratyavaya-b etur a t indriyo

’

n tya-duhk ha

samvijnana—v irodhi,”

and “

prak rstad adharmat svalpa

dharma -sahitat preta -t iryagyon i-s thanesv -anista-Sarira

indriya-v i saya-duhk hadibhir yogo bhavat i

I t w i l l be seen tha t m er i t and demer i t cannot properly

be a ttr ibutes in th e stric t sen se .

A ccord ing .to V .S . the presen t l i fe in the cycl e o f

transm i gra t i on i s the resu l t of adrsta . P l ea sure and

pa in are produced by con tact of sel f w ith m ind ,sens e-organ s

,and obj ects ( 5 , 2 ,

P l ea sure and pa in

cause desire and av ers ion ; d esi r e and av ersi on impress

m er i t and demer i t on sel f ; and th is m er it and dem er it

are adrsya for th e n ext l i fe ( 6 , 2 ,1 0 A mong sel f

,

m ind,sen se-organ s

,and obj ects th e two la st are neutra l ,

and se l f is one and a ll-pervad ing in i ts rea l na ture . M ind

plays the princ ipa l part in th e producti on of cogn i t ion,

rem in i scen ce,dream ing

,and con sc i ousn ess in dream ing

,

and especia l ly of pl ea sure and pa in . Con sequen t ly,for

th e a tta inm en t of emanc ipa tion i t i s n ece ssary to restra in

th e m ind . Restra in t o f m ind i s succeeded by yoga ,

wh ich i s defined :“ A bsence of a ction in m ind reposing

in sel f ; non-exi stence of pa in"

in the body— t hi s i s

any merit or demeri t the m eri t and demeri t of h is previous l ives beingexhausted by his experiences o f pleasures and pa ins , and a l l a ffec t ions ,e t c .

, having ceased , a ll h is a c t ions hencefort h are on ly such as are o f the

nature o f pure meri t , t end ing t oward s cessat ion ; and t hese act ionsprod uce in h im the happiness o f con ten tmen t and the d isregard for t hebody ; and

,having brought about happiness d ue t o the vis ion of the

highes t truth , t h is meri t a lso d isappears , the sel f becomes seed less , andt he presen t body fa l l ing o ff it take s no o ther bod ies , and t h is cessa t iono f equipmen t w i th bod ies and so fort h cons t i tutes what is ca l ledemanc ipa t ion (Ganga-natha J ha

’

s trans la t ion ) .1 pp . 280—1 , D emeri t is an a t tribu te o f sel f it brings abou t to the

agen t unhappiness and unpleasant ness it is supersensuous it is

d es troyed by the experienc ing of the last i tem o f pa in,

”and “ pronounced

demerit , a ccompan ied by a sl igh t . t ouc h o f meri t , brings about the

combina t ion (of the self ) w it h undesirable body,sense-organs , object s

and pains in the world o f ghosts and anima ls

V A I S E S I K A PH ILOS OPHY

yoga”

. By practis ing yoga a djrsm,wh ich causes the

egress and ingress of m ind from, and into

,bod ies

,etc . ,

can be extingui shed ( 5 , 2, A fter tha t the conjunct ion

with new bod i es is stopped,and a new l i fe n ever takes

place . Thi s i s eman cipa t i on ( 5 ,2

,1 8 ; 6 ,

2, P r . E h.

ca l l s emanci pat ion dagdha-indhana-analavad upasama

wh ich i s the wel l-known express ion for the Buddhi st

N i rvana .

S ound (p . 98 )

S ound ( s’

abda ) i s here trea t ed l ike'

th e other four

attributes colour , etc . I n V .S . sabda has three mean ings,

but.‘

in th is passage i t relates to the fi rst sort . P r. E h .

d i v ides i t in to two sorts,va rna -laksa zza and dhvcmi

laksana avaw za -la ksa na ) , and ca l l s i t “ momen tary

l ike al l th e attr ibut es o f sel f

V .S . states tha t sound i s not an a t tribute O f th ings

wh ich possess touch,noi' of s el f

,n or O f m ind

,but i s the

m ark O f th e ex i sten ce of ether,and i s perce i v ed by the ear

( s’

rotra -graha na ) it i s an a ttr ibute . Though the author

of V .S . clea rly sta tes tha t sound i s an a ttr ibute,he does

not enumera te it among the se v enteen a ttr ibutes,becaus e

sound has a specia l qua l i ty ,w hich wi l l be descr ibed in the

notes on ch . i i .

S ect i on 4 .—A ction ( pp . 98— 9 )

The defin i t ion of a ct i on has been quoted in th e notes on

ch . i , 1 ,l . V .S . says further tha t a ction i s the common

cause of conj un ction ,di sjun ction , and impetus ( 1 , 1 ,

but i t can n e ver be the cause o f'

substances and a ct ions

( 1 , 1 , 2 1 ; 1 ,l ,

nor the effect of a ction s ( 1 , 1 , 24“

1,1

,P r . E h. expla ins it in deta i l and ca l ls it

mom en tary

1 5 ,“t ad -anarambha atma-st he manasi s'arirasva d uhk ha-abhavah

sa yogah .

2 p . 282 .

pp . 287—8.

pp. 1 1 , 290 ff .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 72 V A I S E S I K A PHIL OS OPHY

together w i th the act ion going,are d istinguished from the

fo l l owing two s'

orts on accoun t of res id ing in a tom s .

E tc.

”

in both defin i tion s includes binary atom i c compounds,

e tc .,and other corporea l substan ces .

V .S . says tha t fa l l ing (pa ta n a ) resul ts from gra v i ty,

when conjunction or impress i on i s absen t .1 But th i sfa l l ing i s not exact ly the sam e a ct ion as a vaksep ana ,

wh ich i s not spec ia l ly expla ined in V .S . and P r. E h.

The A ction s con tra cting ,expan ding , an d 99)

The a ct ions contracting (alca ncan a ) and expand ing

(pra sarana ) are understood when we contract and expand

the hands .

“A th ing ( regarded a s) fixed in th e n ear

end, or thing conn ected at th e n ear end

” presupposes

large and l ong substan ces,i.e . substances from ternary

a tom i c compounds upwards . A ccord ingly,these a ction s

do not take place in atom s and binary a tom i c compounds .

By applying these a ction s to trees,etc .

,in ert ia is

expla ined . E la sti c ity (sthiti-sthapaka ) in P r. E h. i s one

of the causes O f these a cti on s .

V .S . does not d i st in ctly m ent ion these act ion s , but

P r . E h . defines them, rj uno dravyasya-agra-avaya vanarn

t ad-desair vibhagah samyogas ca' mula-prade éair yen a

karmana-avaya vi k ut ilah samjayat e t ad ak uficanam,

” 2

and “tad-viparyayena samyoga

-vibhaga-utpat tau yena

ka rmana-a vaya vi rj uh sampadyate tat prasaranam

A s for the a ct i on going (gaman a ) , K w hé i-ci remark s

tha t “ the acti on'

going i s th e cause of the conj oin ing and

di sj o in ing ( in success ion ) of corporea l substances T he

act ion go ing res id es I n a tom s and other large and long

substances as wel l .x 5 ,

1, 7 ; 5 , 1 , 8 f .

2 pp. 29 1—2 , T he a c t ion cont rac t ing is the a c t ion by wh ich a s tra igh tsubs t an ce be comes curved by reason o f it s part ic les a t the further endbecom ing d is jo ined from t ha t place and com ing in con t ac t wi th the placenear t he base, ” and “

t he ac t ion e xpand ing is the ac t ion whereby thesubst ance becomes stra igh te ned by re ason of the bringing about o f

con junc t ion ,d isjunc t ion in d irec t ions Opposed t o the a foresa id ”

.

D A S A P A DA R TH I ; NOTES , I . 4 : A CT ION 1 73

V .S . says that upward or sideward mot ion (ardhe‘

a or

t iryag-gamana ) resu l ts from a parti cula r impul s i on

,wh ich

i s produced by a parti cu lar eff ort ; 1 but P r. E h. clea rly

d efines i t yad aniyata-d ik-pradesa-sarhyoga-v ibhaga

k aranam tad gamanarh”

.

2

V .S . expla in s the act ions in bod i es and the i r m embers,

a nd in things in nature 3 th i s part O f’

th e su tra exh ib i ts

a characteri stic of the system a s a natura l ph i losophy

o f . ancien t Ind ia . P r. E h. a l so expla in s sa t-pra tyaya

asa t-pra tyaya and apra tyaya J carma,

4and gen era l ly

agrees w i th V .S . S om e of these explanati on s are stated

in the treati se ( ch . i i,

The above three ca tegor i es in dependence upon one

another expla in all obj ects as they a ctua l ly are . The three

categori es ha ve two a spects,as principles of class ifica t ion

and a s princ ip l es of ana lyt ica l Obser vat ion . I n th e la tt er

aspect they are further ana lysed into causes and effects,

and into eterna l and non-eterna l , except a ct ions , wh ich are

a lways non-eterna l , wh i l e in the form er a spect they are

the nam es of the three c la sses O f th ings,and include t h ings

in all the sta tes,causes , and effects

,etc . ; con sequen tly ,

they, are characteri zed as f ol l ows ex istence,non-etern ity

,

inhesion in substan ce , effect , cause , and possess ion of uni

v ersality and part icu lar ity are the common ( chara cter i st ics)of substances , a ttr ibutes , and act ions .

” 5

S ect ion s 5 —6 . Un iversa lity and P articu larity

(pp. 99—100)V .S . says

, samanya -v iée sa i ti buddhy -apek sam.

” 6

Buddhy-apeksa has not the idea l ist ic m ean ing in the

1 5 , 1 , 8—10.

2 p. 292 , T he ac t ion go ing is t ha t wh ich is the cause of conjunc t ionsa nd d is j unc t ions w it h and from point s Of space in any d irec t ion .

”

3 5 , 1 , 1—5 , 2 , 2 1.

4 pp . 297-309.

5 l , 1 , 8 , sad anityarii dravyava t karyamkaranan'

i samanya-v isesavad

it i dravya-guna-karmanam av is’

esah . Cf . R O‘

er, Va iées ika szi tra , ZUMC . ,

vol . xx i i , p. 320.

6 1 , 2 , 3, Un iversal ity and part iculari ty bot h depend upon intel lect ion .

1 74 V A I S E S I K A PH IL OS OP HY

epi stemologica l sen se , tha t i s , un iversa l i ty and parti culari ty

are not , as some idea l i st s hold , th e mere form s of i dea ,but

they each have rea l i ty,l ik e the other categor i es . The

mean ing of the satra is tha t un i versa l i ty and pa rticulari ty

are rela t i v e and no t absolute . For instance,substance

n ess,a ttr ibute-n ess

,a ct i on-n ess

,earth-n ess

,colour-n ess

,

throwing-upwards-n ess , pot-ness , and so on ,are som etim es

in cluded in un i versa l i ty and som et imes in part i culari ty .

The h ighest un iversa l i ty i s ex i sten ce and on ly one,wh i l e

the lowest parti cu la ri ty i s the u l tima te part i culars (or the

fina l species) and more than on e .

1 The former corresponds

to th e category in the class ificati on of concepts in l ogic,

and the la tter to indi v idua l or s ingl e concepts. There are

many rela t i v e un i versa l i t i es and .part i cular iti es,wh ich

correspond to gen era and speci es,in t erven ing between th e

two extrem e s .

P r . E h.

,as sta ted in the In troducti on

,d i v ides un i versa l i ty

into two sorts,the h ighest un i v ersa l i ty and the l ower

un i versa l i ty . The form er con ta in s ex is ten ce on ly,whi l e

the latter includes rela t i ve un i versa l i t i es and part i cula ri t i es ,tha t i s

,substance-n ess down to pot-n ess . The h ighest

un i versa l i ty i s un i versa l i ty proper , and the lower i s

sometim es ca l l ed part i cu lar i ty .

2

P a rti cular i ty is“nitya

-dravya-vrt tayo’

n tya v iéesah

( th e u lt imate pa rti cular it i es wh ich exi st in the eterna l

substan ces ) and includes a toms , eth er , t ime , space , sel f ,and m ind .

Un i versa l i ty in th e treat i s e is exactly th e sam e a s

th e h ighes t un i v ersa l i ty in P r . E h sometim es s implyca l l ed ex i stence . I n ch . i i the term un i versa l i ty is om i tted

and ex i st en ce i s used . Consequen t ly , th e word excludes

the lower un i versa l i ty , wh ich i s a d ist inct category , ca l l ed

in the t reati se un i versa l i ty-pa rt i cula ri ty common-ness) .1 1 , 2 , 4-7.

pp. 1 1 , 31 1 . V . S . 1 , 2 , 4 , bhavo’nuvrt t er eva he tut vat samanyam

e va . S amangam era m igh t have been unders t ood as sdmd nya proper,or i t sel f.

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 76 V A I S E S I K A PH IL OSOPHY

c ause o f exclud ing a tt r ibutes , etc . , and determ in ing tha t

the one i s a substance d i fferent from attr ibut es,etc . but

t he explanation i s not a cceptabl e . Cf . Ch . i i, 6 , and the

notes on that sect ion . The other deta i l s w i l l be stated inthe notes on oh . i , 1 0 .

S ect i on 7 .— I nheren ce (p . 1 00)

V .S . defin es inherence ( samavaya ) iha—i dam iti yatah

karya-karanayoh sa samavayah”

,

1and

,aga in

,n isk riyanam

samavayah k armabhyo n isiddhah”

.

2

P r . E h. defines i t ayuta-s iddhanam adhary-adhara-bhu

tanamyah sambandha iha-pratyaya-hetuh sa samavayah”

.

3

A yu ta-siddha i s the essentia l cond it ion of inherence

,by

whi ch inherence i s d ist ingu i shed from conjunct ion . Thi s

defin i ti on has a relat ion to V .S .

“ yuta-siddhy-abhavatkarya-k aranayoh samyoga-v ibhagau na vidyet e K arya

Icaranayoh in V .S . ( 7 ,2 , 26 ) prin cipa l ly refers to the

spat ia l causa l i ty between substan ces and th e ir a ttr ibutes

and a ct ion s,and i s repla ced by ayuta-siddhanam adhary

adhara-bhutanam sambandhe in P r . E h.

The defin i t ion in the treati se comes from P r. E h.

S ubstances,etc. includes

,according to P r . E h. ,

5attri

butes,act ion s

,un i versa l i ty

,and pa rti culari ty ; but in the

t reat i se i t includes the e ight categori es other than

inherence i tse l f and th e ten th category non-ex i stence .

With respect to the in separabl e connex ion ” corresponds

to“ayuta-siddhanar

’

n sambandhe “ Its rea l i ty i s

1 7, 2 , 26 ,“ That is inherence by v irtue o f wh ich it may be sa id Of

c ause and e ffec t t ha t the one is in t he other. ”“3 5 , 2 , 23,

“ T he inherence o f t h ings inact ive (i. e . a t tributes and

ac t ions ) is exc luded from a c t ions .

3 pp . 12 , 324 ,“ Inherence is the cause o f the not ion ( that the one )

is here ( in the o ther) in the rela t ionsh ip subs ist ing among t h ings t ha ta re inseparable, s tand ing t o one anot her in the charact er o f the containera nd the con ta ined .

”

7, 2 , 13, Inasmuch as there is non-exist ence o f unconnect edness ,t here is no conjunc t ion and d isjunct ion Of an effect and it s cause. ”

5 p . 324 .

D A S A P ADA R TH I ; NOTE S , 1 . 7 : INHE RENCE 1 77

o ne has the same mean ing as V .S .

“ tattvam bhavenaa nd as P r. E h.

“na ca samyogavan nanatvam bhavaval

l inga-aviSesad viSesa-l inga-abhavac ca tasmad bhava vat

sarva tra-ek ah samavaya i ti

A ccord ing to the commentators ’ reading th e defin i t i on

i s to be tran sla ted by “ the category inherence i s that wh i ch

makes substances,e tc. , inseparabl e and conn ected , and the

cause O f the recogn it ion (with respect to them ) tha t ( the

one ) i s here ( in the other) K Whé i-c i expla in s tha t “ i t

makes substances,a ttr ibut es

,and a ct i ons inseparable and

conn ected w ith one another and the comm en tators

expla in that “ i t mak es separa ted th ings insepa rable and

connected ”

, or , strangely ,

“ i t makes substan ces in separabl e

and conn ected , so tha t substances produce eff ects .”

Inherence consists in ayn ta-siddha-bhi

‘

i ta toa and can

n e v er mak e s eparated th ings inseparable and conn ected

w i th one another ; that i s to say ,the in separabl e conn ex ion

in th ings i s not produced anew by inherence , and inherence

has no product iveness a t al l , but i s th e in timate connex ion

in the inseparably conn ected th ings . I f th e defin i t i on shoul d

be understood as the commentators expla in i t,the idea of

inherence in the treati se woul d be qu i te d iff erent from

V .S . and P r . E h.,and would not be con s i sten t wi th the

genera l mode O f th inking in the V a is’

esik a . A nd inherence

woul d not be distinguished from conjunct ion,so tha t i t

woul d not be a d ist inct ca tegory .

The V aiéesika class ifies Obj ects and ana lyses them into

e ffect s and causes,th e la tter of wh i ch are eterna l and

not produced from others .3 E ven in substances as cause s

there are attr i butes and a ction s res id ing . I f th ese

causes cou l d be produced from certa in fina l causes, wh ich

1 28 ,“ I ts reali ty (is expla ined ) by exis tence (see 1 , 2 ,

2 p . 326 ,“ Inherence has no d ivers ity such as conjunct ion has , and

because Of the non-part icularity o f the mark and o f t he non-exis tenceo f a part icular mark t herein l ike ex is tence t here is on ly one in everyplace , as in the case o f ex is tence (see V . S . 1 , 2 ,

3 V . S . 4 , l , 1 , “sad akaranavan nityarii .

1 78 V A I S E S I K A PH I L OS OPHY

ha v e no a t tr ibutes and action s , they woul d be made

inseparabl e and connected by the force of inherence w ith

o ther substances , a ttr ibut es , and action s in th e course o f

be ing produced . But inherence i s eterna l and a lwaysres ides in substances . Bes i des

,inheren ce

,l ike the other

categories, origina l ly came from the concep tua l ana lys i s

of th ings , and w as con sidered,from th e rea l i stic standpoin t

o f th e system ,a s rea l ly ex i sting in the obj ect i ve world .

Therefore,inherence , l ik e the other ca t egori es , has its

origin in abstract ion , and has n ot ex i sten ce before

substances , however independen t i t i s of the la tter.Con sequen t ly , the comm en ta tors

’ reading must be

understood as fol lows Tha t substances,etc . , are

inseparable and connected wi th one another i s possi bl e

by v i rtue of inheren ce , or tha t substances , etc ,are

inseparable and conn ected i s n oth ing but inherence .

S ections 8— 9 .—P oten tia lity a n d N c i t —p oten tia lity (p . 1 00)

A ccord ing to V .S . the first three categor i es ha v eproducti v e facul ti es , a l though a ttributes and acti ons are

inact i v e .

( 1 ) O ne substan ce origina tes a substance,a ttr ibutes ,

act i ons , and substan ces , and ( 2) many substances originate

another substan ce of the sam e class .1 ( 3 ) O ne a t t ribut e

origina tes substances , a ttr ibutes , and action s,and ( 4 ) many

a t t ributes a lso originate substances , a ttr ibutes , and acti ons .2

A nd ( 5 ) one a ct ion origina t es a t tr ibutes , and ( 6 ) many

a ct ions origina te a ttri butes 3 ; but a ct ion n ever origina tes

any substan ce or any act ion .

I n th e defin i tion of the trea t i se s’

akti (potent ia l i ty )is rendered by “ ha v ing pot entia l i ty or facul ty but

the text of the Bodle ian L ibra ry has “ potentia l i ty in

ch . i,1 . Th i s i s a better tran s la t ion , because

“ having

l 1 , 1 , 9- 10 ; 1 , 1 , 23 ;

2 - 10 ; -9 ; 1 , l , 19.

3 l , Cf . -2 ;

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 80 V A I S E S I K A P H IL O S OPHY

may originate one and all eff ects ; but by v irtue o f the

category everyth ing producti v e originates its ow n effects

and i s preven ted from originat ing the effects of others .

S ection 1 0 .— Commonn ess (pp . 1 00— 1 )

Commonn ess (un iversa l i ty-pa rt i cula r i ty) i s h ere rendered

in Chinese common-di fference The Ch inese translator

usua l ly translates saman ga by un i v ersa l i ty or genera l i ty ”

and ois’

esa by“ parti cu lari ty ”

, so tha t“ common-di fference

seem s a t the first s igh t the tran slation of other words

but the translator uses the term un i v ersa l i ty-parti cular i ty

a s the tran slat ion of samanga-vis

‘

esa in ch . i i,1 0. A nd

fiK w hé i-c i a sserts that th e category commonness i s the.same as the (fifth ) ca tegory samanga -vis

’

esa acknowledged

by former teachers. The a ssertion i s not str ictly correct ;but i t show s tha t the S ansk rt equ i va l en t of “ common

d i fference i s saman ga -vis‘

esa .

Commonn ess,as a consequen ce of the h i stor i ca l d e

v elopmen t,corresponds to V .S .

“ dra vya tvar'

n gunat var’

n

k armat vafi ca samanyan i v iée sas ca” l

and to the low er

un i versa l i ty in P r . E h. P r . E h. says,

aparar'

n dra vya tva

gunat va karmat va adi ( i.e . prthivitva rupat va utk se

panat va gotva gha ta tva pata tva adi) anuvrtti vyavrtt i

hetutvat samanyam vis’

esas ca bhavati.” 2

K w h é i-ci expla in s,

“ commonn esses are the essences of

substances,attributes

,and act ions ( i.e . commonn esses are

substan ce -n ess , attribute -n ess , and a ction -n ess ) . They

a re the genera l commonn esses in the three cat egori es .

E arth -n ess , colour -n ess, and so on are the parti cu lar

commonnesses. Commonness does not ex ist in the other

categor i es ( i.e . un i versa l i ty, parti culari ty,inherence

,

1 l , 2 , 5 ,“ S ubst ance-ness, a t tribute-ness , and ac t ion-ness are uni

v ersalit ies and part icularit ies .

”

2 p . 3 1 1 ,“ T he lower universa l i ty is subs t ance-ness ; a t t ribut e-ness ,

ac t ion-ness , e t c . (i. e . eart h-ness , co lour-ness , t hrowing-upwards-ness ,cow -ness , pot

-ness , c lo th-ness , a nd is regarded a s un iversa l ity a s

wel l a s part icularity , inasmuch as it is the cause Of inc lusion as wel las exc lus ion .

”

D A S A P A DA R TH I ; NO TES , I . 1 0 : COMMO NNE S S 1 8 1

potentia l i ty ,and non-potent ia l i ty , except natura l ly non

existence and commonn ess) . It is perce i ved by a ll th e

sen se-organs. Commonness i s the same as th e (fifth )category

,un i versa l i ty -particularity

,a cknowl edged by

form er teachers . It i s nam ed commonness,because it

”

denotes that a th ing is,on the one hand , common to , and

on the other hand,particular in d istinction from ,

another .

It i s perce ived by all th e sense-organs is not a ccura te,

as stated later on .

A s for the ( fi fth ) category ,un i versa l i ty-parti cular ity ,

we ha ve K w hei-c i’s explanat ion in his commentary on

N o

Kanada then proceeded to expla in the category

un i versa l ity pa rticular ity . It is that wh ich mak es

substances,a ttributes

,and a ctions gen era l and part icu lar .

These three categor ies ha ve each one un i v ersa l ity

part icular ity common to the i r respecti ve members

( i.s . the un i versal i ty-part icular ity of substances , wh ich i s

substance-n ess , is common to all th e substances ; but i t

i s particular in d istinct ion from a ttributes and a ct ion s ,and so on ) . A nd e very member con ta ined in these three

categories has the specia l un i versa l i ty-particula rity ( tha t

is,the un i versal i ty-particular ity o f earth

,which i s earth

ness,is not common to the other substan ces , wa ter , etc . ,

but it is common to a ll the m embers con ta ined in earth ,

and so on ) . Thus,th ere are , further , the common and

the specia l un i versa l i t i es-parti cu lari ties among a ll th ings

conta ined in th e three categories ( that is , cow-ness ,pot-n ess

,atom-n ess

,The category un iversa l i ty

part i culari ty,be ing the fi fth of the s i x categories ,

natura l ly includes the u l tima te pa rticulars . I f the

ul timate particulars are put a side , th e category is ,exactly

th e sam e as th e n inth ca tegory .

K w hé i-ci,expla in ing the fi fth category particularity in

the treatise,says

,

“ particular ity i s man i fold , because it

1 D a inihon-zoku-zokyo, 86 , bk . 4 , p . 388b.

1 82 V A I S E S I K A PH ILOS OPHY

resides in the n ine substan ces . Its numbers are indefin i te,

because there are th e common particu larity possessed

by a ll the substances (or the'

particu laritie s common ly

possessed by each of the substan ces) , and many of the

specia l pa rt i culari t i es possessed by e v ery substance

The n in e substances ha v e each the i r d ifferentiat ions .

The common pa rt iculari ty mean s substance-n ess ( or the

pa rt icu larit i es m ean ea rth-n ess,m ind-ness

,e tc ) ; and the

Spec ia l particularities ” earth-n ess,a tom-n ess

,cow-ness

,

pot-n ess,etc . The explanation seems to be con fused w ith

the n inth cat egory.

A s to substance-ness P r. E h. says , dra vyat vam paras

para-viéistesu prt hivy-adisv-anuvrt ti-hetut vat samanyam,

guna-k armabhyo vyavrt ti-hetut vat v is

'

esah. A ttr ibute

n ess and act ion—ness are Sim i larly defined .

1 E a rth-ness,

etc . , are stated a s prt hivitva-rfipa t va

-utk sepana t va-got va

ghat at va-pa tatva

-adinam api prany-apran i-ga tanam anu

vrtti-vyavrtti-he tut vat samanya

-viSesa-bhavah siddhah 1

V .S . does not d istinct ly s ta te them .

P ercept ibi l ity of substance-n ess,etc ., i s stated in V .S . as

etena guna tv e bhav e ca sar va-indriyam j fianam vya

k hyatam” 2

and P r . E h. says,

“ bhava -dravya t va-gunat va

k armat vad inam upa labdhy-adhara-samavetanam aéraya

grahak air indriyair grahanam.

” 3 Tha t substance-n ess

and a ction -ness are perce i v ed by the eyes and the touch

organ can be inferred ,because the obj ects of the other

three organs are excluded from substan ce -n ess and

a ct ion -ness .1 p . 3 1 1 , S ubs tan ce-ness is universa li ty , inasmuch a s it is t he cause Of

t he inc lus ion w it h re spec t t o such m utua l ly d iff eren t t h ings as eart h , e t c . ,

a nd it is part icularity , ina smuch a s it is t he cause Of t he exc lusion Ofa t tributes and ac t ions .

”E art h-ness , c o lour-ness

,t hrowing-upwards

ness , c ow -ness , po t -ness , c lo t h-ness , e tc . , t ha t inhere in an imate and

inan im a te t h ings , are a lso establ ished a s un iversa l it ies and part icularit iesinasmuch as t hey a re the causes Of inc lus ion and exc lus ion .

”

2 4 , 4 , 1 , 6—12 .

3 p . 187, E x is te nce , subs tance-ness , a t tribute-ness , a c t ion-ness , e t c .

,

which are inheren t in the recep tac les of presen t at ion ,i. e . subst anc es ,

are

perceived by means o f t hese sense-organs t ha t perce ive t heirsubs tra t a .

”

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 84 V A I S E S I K A P H IL OS OP HY

and then to i ts attr ibutes and act ion s . “ The cause and

accessor i es mean s the produc ing substan ces , poten tia l i ty

and non-poten t ia l i ty .

S ubsequen t non-ex i stence (pradhoan'

i sa or dhoan'

i sa

abhava,or -a sa t) i s l i tera l ly

“a l ready -destroyed non

ex i sten ce Thi s non-ex i sten ce i s expla ined in V .S . 9 ,1,

2—3 and 9,1, 6 .

“ A fter the force o f the i r causes had

been exhausted or the accessori es for the i r o v erthrow

had been produced rela tes to poten tia l ity and non

potent ia l i ty .

Reciproca l non-ex istence (angonga -abhd oa or -a sa t) and

absolute non-exi stence (a tyan ta -a bhc‘

w a or -a sa t) are

expla in ed in V .S . 9 1, ‘

4 ; 9 ,1,8 and 9, 1 , 5 ; 9 , 1 , 9 .

E tc .

” includes at trl butes , etc .

N atura l non-ex i stence i s l i tera l ly “unassociated non

exi stence Th i s non-ex i stence i s , in the trea ti se,of two

sorts,eterna l and non-eterna l . Chapter i i ( 1 0, 1 ) expla in s

them as fol lows“ I n wha t case i s natura l non-ex i sten ce eterna l

The substances , earth ,etc . , are not in the inheren t

relation to other a ttr ibutes ( than the i r ow n ) . Un i versa l i ty

particu lari ty ( i.e . common-ness ) , l ik e substance-n ess , etc . ,potent ia l i ty

,non-poten t ia l i ty

,and part icu lari ty

,does not

inhere in substra ta other than i ts ow n ( respecti ve one ) .

E xistence does not ex i st in un i versa l i ty,e tc .

I n what case i s natura l non-exi sten ce non-et erna l

There is the ca se where a substan ce does not conj o in

w ith other substances; but wi l l certa in ly conj oin wi th thema fterw a rds . (Before the conjun ction takes place) the

former does not ex i st in th e la tter.

O r, before a substance com es to conj oin wi th another

substance and makes th e attr ibutes and a ction s thereo f

inheren t in itsel f , th e latter do not ex i st in the former.”

The former case is hardly d iff eren t from reciproca l (and

absolute) non-ex istence , wh i l e the latt er i s noth ing but

anteceden t non ex i st ence . S ubsequent non ex i stence

DA S A P A DA R TH I ; NOTES , 1 . 1 1 : NON-E XISTENCE 1 8 5

cannot be included in th e la tter cas e , because subsequen t

non-exi stence , together w i th reci proca l and absolute non

ex i stence is,a ccord ing to the trea t i se

,eterna l ; but i t

cannot poss ibly be in cluded in the former case,as the

nam e i tsel f Opposes . Hence the fi v e non-ex isten ces may

be cla ss ified into two sorts,na tura l and subsequen t non

exi stence . But in both ca ses the d iv i s ion i s a cross

d iv is ion . The fact ev idently shows tha t the enumera tion

o f th i s natura l non-exi stence cam e from V .S . nasti gha to

geh e i t i sato ghatasya geha- samsarga

-pra tisedhah .

” 1

Therefore,th e author der ived th e first four non-ex isten ces

from sit tra s 9,1,1—9 , and the fi fth from 9 ,

1, 1 0 .

Na tura l non ex istence corresponds to samsarga

pra tisedha , and the or igina l S ansk rt seems to hav e been

sani sarga abhava or -a sa t,or sa insa rga pra tisedha

a bhaoa or’ -a sa t. I n V .S . sani sarga-pra tisedha re la tes

to a pot and a house,that is, to substances as effects ;

but the treat i se appl i es i t to the ca tegori es . Cf . N yaya

koéa,pp . 8 5 7—8 , V .S . 1

,2,1—2 .

1 9 , l , 10, (T he propos it ion ) t ha t there is no t a wa ter-pot in a houseis a nega t ion o f conne x ion between an ex istent water-pot and the

house. ”

But the S iddhanta-mnktd va l i (pp . 33-4 ) and the T a rka -ka umud i (p. 19 )

d ivide non-ex istence int o tw o sort s , angonga -abhd va and samsarga-abhd va .

T he la t t er con ta ins p rcig-a bhd va , pra cthvamsa-a bhd ua , and a tyanta

o hhara .

1 86 V A I S E S I K A PH IL OS OPHY

CHAPTER II

S ect ion 1 .— S ubstan ce ( pp . 1 02— 5 )

1 . S ubstan ces A ctive an d I n a ctive (p . 102)

V .S . says , d ik-kalav akasan ca k riyavad-va idharmyan

nisk riy ani ;1 but P r. E h . m en t ion s tha t earth

,wa ter

,fire

,

wind,and m ind are on ly act i ve. The author

O f the treati se fol lows the latte r. The Upa skd ra ,th e

V ivrti,and even the Ca ndra -kan ta—bhasya

3a ccept the

Op in ion and con s ider tha t the sutra impl i es the addi t ion

of self . Thi s op in ion s eem s not to be correct .

V .S . sta t es,

atma samyoga prayatnabhyam hast e

ka rma,

” “atm a-k arma ha sta-samyogac ca

,

”

and “atma

k armasu mok so vyak hyatah”

.

4

The Upa skd ra expla in s the first sutra ,

“A ction in the

hand a s i ts inheren t cause i s by m ean s O f conjunct ion wi th

sel f,and O f effort of sel f . O f thi s a ct i on the non-inheren t

cause i s conjun ct i on w i th se l f possess ing effort . E ff ort i s

the effici en t.

cause .

” 5 The second sutra is expla ined thus

The term se l f trop ica l ly sign ifies a port ion o f the body .

The a ct i on t hen of the se l f,that i s , of a m ember of the

body,tha t i s

,o f t he hand

,resul ts from conjuncti on of

1 5,2,2 1

, S pace and t ime, t oge t her w i th ether, are inac t ive , beingd issim i lar t o t ha t wh ich possesses ac t ion .

2 p . 2 1 .

3 B ut it remark s , “atma t u t a tha-bhut o pi m anasa samsrj y amanah

k riyavan iva bhava t i vyavahara-bhfimav it i.

4 5 , l , 1 , “ A c t ion in t he hand is by means O f c onjunc t ion w ith , andeffort o f , sel f 5 , 1 , 6 , A c t ion Of sel f is a lso from c on junc t ion w i t ht he hand ,

”and 6 , 2 , 16 , E manc ipa t ion is d ec lared as dependen t on the

a c t ions of sel f. ”5 Gough ’

s translat ion , a l i t t le m od ified .

“atmanahsamyoga-pray a tnau

tabhyam has te samavayi-karane k arma t asya ca k armanah praya t na

vad -atma-samyogo’

sam avay i-karanam pra y at nas ca n im it t a-karanam.

”

But n imitta -kdrana is no t m en t ioned in V . S . ,t herefore t he explanat ion

mus t be as fol lows A c t ion in t he hand has the hand as it s sama vdg i

karana , and conjunc t ion w it h , and eff ort o f , sel f a s it s a sama vd yiCon junc t ion wi t h sel f possess ing eff ort is not t he correc t explana t ion .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 88 V A I S E S IK A PHILOSOPHY

sel f,emanc ipa t ion ensues ” 1 Bes ides

,the V aiéesik a

’

s

chara cteri st i c doc trin e i s the K riya-vada ,

d i ffer ing from

the S amkhya ,the V edan ta and other syst em s . T he

K r iya-vada m ean s th e doctrine wh ich holds tha t s el f i s

act i ve , or sel f i s a ffected by pl easure or des i re,e tc .

2

Bhava-v i v eka in h i s P raj na-d ipa -sastra states tha t the

sel f of the V aiée sik a i s ca l l ed hartr 3(an agen t) .

O n the other hand , i f“ the d iss im i lar i ty to the a ct i v e

substan ces m ean s “ the incorporea l i ty O f space , etc for

a ction res ides on ly in the corporea l a s th e Upa shd ra

ma in ta ins,the a ct i v i ty O f sel f must be rej ected

,a s in the

ca se of a ttr ibutes and a ction s . 5 The comm en tators a ccept

th i s con sequence . I f so,the m ean ing of the K riya

-vada

i s to be restr icted to “ sel f i s not act i ve,but it is affect ed

by the attributes and the act i ons ”

. Thi s is a l so not

correct.

The defin i t ion of substan ces is that substan ces possess

act ions and a ttr ibutes,and are inheren t causes . But

possess ing act ions and attri butes has a lmost the sam e

mean ing as be ing inheren t causes,because inheren t cause

mean s the substratum o f both a ttr ibutes and a ctions , or

of e ither a t tr ibutes or actions . The chara cteri st i c of ether ,t im e , and space

,cons ist s in being the inheren t causes o f

a t t ributes , whi le the fi ve corporea l substan ces,the four

a tom s and m ind,are the inheren t causes of both a ttri butes

and act ion s . But the first acti on of a tom s and m ind

comes from a drsta ,and m ind has no ac t i v i ty when yoga

i s pract i sed .

6 A ccord ingly,e ven the five substan ces are

no t n ecessari ly a c t i v e . A ga in,P r . E h . d is t in ct ly stat es

tha t a drsta has no a cti v i ty (ortti) during the t ime of the1 at in a-k armasu sat su m ok so bha vat i.’1 S BB. ,

vol . xlv , p . xxxv .

3 N O . 1 185 , p . c f . N . S . 3 , l , 6 . D harma-pala s tates t ha t se l f inabso lu t e em anc ipa t ion is not a c t ive a ny m ore.

1 T he Upa skd ra on 5 , 2 , 2 1 says , k riyavatam vaidharmyam d ig

ad inam am firtat vammurty-anuvidhanat k riyayah .

”

5 5 , 2 , 22 .

6 5 , 5,

D A S A P A DA R TH I ; NOTES , 1 1. 1 : SUBS TANCE , 1 1 89

world ’s d i ssolution .

1 The substances have na tura l ly no

a cti v ity dur ing tha t t ime . Therefore,the n ecessary

cond ition common to a ll th e substan ces i s sol ely that of

be ing inheren t cause s of a ttributes . The d i stinct ion

between space , etc .,and th e fi v e corporea l substan ces i s

tha t the latter ha v e capability o f a ctions , wh i l e th e former

have it no t .

“ The d i ss im i lari ty O f spa ce , e tc .,to the

a ct i v e substances ” cann ot logica l ly mean th e in corpore

a l i ty of space , etc .

I t i s e v iden t from wha t has been sa i d tha t in th e

V aiéesik a the first and on ly source of a cti ons i s adrsta .

What then is adrsta ? A drsta is,as expla in ed abo v e

,

a k ind of mer it and dem er i t, and causes t he combina ti on

O f a tom s form ing th e body on th e one hand and th e

world on the other . I n th e former ca se the egress and

ingress (of m ind from and in to bod i es) , etc .,are caused by

i t, and e ven in da i ly l i fe the pro duct i on O f desi re and

a vers ion,etc .

,i s caused by it. Con sequen tly

,adrsta i s th e

princ ipa l h inderer O f eman c ipa ti on .

2 I n the la tter ca se

part i cular a ct ions in earth,the c i rculation in trees

,th e

upwa rd flam ing of fi re,the s ideward blow ing of w ind

,

the movemen t O f the gem ,and th e approach of the

n eed le 3 are caused by i t .

P r. E h. holds tha t adrsta i s an a ttr ibute ; but in the

str ict sense i t i s not an a ttr ibute,because adrsta i s an

absolute cause o f conj unction .

‘1 O n the oth er hand ,adrsta

i s not an a ct ion,because it i s a cause O f a ct ions . V .S . says

that inaugura tions,fa sting

,continence . residence in the

fam i ly of a sp ir itua l guide,l i fe in the forest

,sacrifice

,

a lmsgi v ing, obla t ion , th e card ina l points, const el lat ion s ,sacred texts , seasons, and rel igious Obser vances conduce to

1 pp. 48—9 . I f'

a drs ta be an a t tribute , it cannot have an .ac t ion a t

a ny t ime.1 5 , 6 , 5 , S ee 6 ,3 5 , 5

, 5 , 2 . 13 ; 5 , 1 , 15 .

1 5 , 2 , 17—18 .

1 90 V A I S E S I K A PH ILOSOPHY

a drs ta .

1 From th is sutra and as the principa l h inderer

O f emancipa t ion”

adrsta must be rega rded as be ing

a kind of qua l i ty of sel f . Pr . E h. di st inctly ca l l s i t an

a ttr ibute of se l f (sarva -atma -ga ta Sanka ra begin s

one of h is Obj ect i on s aga in st th e V aiéesik a wi th “ I s thisun seen principl e to be cons idered as inher ing in th e self

or in th e a tom 2

I f adrsta ,a s a certa in qua l i ty of se l f

,causes the

combina tion of a toms to form th e body and th e world,all

sorts of a ction s are to be con sidered as com ing from th e

sel f . S el f , then , i s th e on ly cause of act i on s,

3as th e

consequence O f wha t has been stated . Therefore,the sel f

in the V a iéesik a system cannot be en ti rely inact i ve . But

the a cti v i ty O f sel f i s prin cipa l ly con cern ed wi th the

indi v idua l se l f .

A s for the other qua l i t i es enum era ted in th e t reati se,

P r . E h. says tha t earth, wa ter , fire,wind

,se l f

,and

m ind are man i fold (an eha tva ) and conta in l ower speci es

( apara -j atiina ttva ) . A nd earth , water , fi re,wind

,and

m ind have acti v i ty (hriyava ttva ) , corporea l i ty (murta tca ) ,priori ty

,poster ior ity ,

and impetus .‘1

S el f i s on the one hand one and on the other hand

man i fold . I n the lat ter case i t must have priori ty and

posteriori ty . Time and space have a l so priori ty and

posterior i ty ,because they ha ve effect s . E ther has in '

V .S .

no prior i ty and posteriori ty a t a ll,

5 but P r . E h. and the

trea t i se ha v e specia l op in ions concern ing ether .

2 . S abstan ces possessing A ttribu tes , etc. ( p . 1 02 )

S ee the defin i t ion of subs tance . P r .

“

E h. enum erates

the fol lowing qua l i ti es as the properti es common to a ll

1 6 ,‘A bhisecana-upavasa

-brahmacarya-gurukulavasa

-vanaprasthaya jna-dana-prok sana ~d in-nak sat ra-man tra-kala-niyamaé ca-adrstaya .

2 Brahma -satra -bhasya on 2 , 2 , 12.

3 “ Urdhvajva lana-t iryakpavanany-atma-meesa-guna-k rt an i (N

'

ydya

ka nda li , p .

4

5 2 , 1 , 29-31 .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 92 V A I S E S I K A PH ILOSOP HY

t im e inheren t causes . But non e of the other fi v e

substances are product i v e subs tances and inheren t causes

as wel l . Cf . notes on ch . i , 2 , 5 —7 ( ether , t im e , and space)and ch . i i

,1,1 .

4 . S ubstan ces possess ing Colour ,etc. (p . 1 03)

P r . E h. says tha t the three subs tances,earth

,water

,

and fire , have p ra tgahsa tua ,rup a va ttva ,

and drava tva a s

the i r common properti es .1 P ra tyahsa tva m ean s v i s ib i l ity ,

or be ing the Obj ects of s ight . A s to in v i s ibi l i ty,see

V .S . 4,1 , 7 ; 8 ,

1,2 ; — 1 5 .

5 . S ubsta n ces E terna l and N on -etern a l,etc . (p . 1 03 )

The last paragraph requ i res specia l a tten t ion .

I n the t exts of the Bodle ian L ibra ry and the L ibrary of

t he Ind ia O ff ice , i t run s : “ Tha t th ey inhere in another

substan ce or do not inhere in another con s i st O f parts

or do not con s i st of parts are not dest royed by thei r

c auses or are (not not ) destroyed by thei r causes are

not u l t imate ' part icula rs or are u l t imat e par t i cu lars

a nd are not spheri cal or are spher i ca l i s expla in ed as

in the ca se of being eterna l and non-eterna l .

The t exts of the commen tar i es NOS. 9 and 10 have the

fol lowing order ' “ That they do not inhere in another

substan ce or inhere in another do n ot con s is t of

parts or cons ist of parts are not destroyed by the i r

causes or are (not not ) dest royed by the i r causes are

not u l t ima t e parti cu la rs or are u l t imate part i cu la rs ( 4 )and are spher i ca l or are not spher i ca l i s expla ined

I n the form er texts the order of the a ffirmat i ve and the

n ega t i ve clauses agrees w ith tha t of be ing eterna l and

non-eterna l , except (4 ) and The order seems to ha ve

been re v ersed in the course O f transm i s s ion by copying

w i th a V i ew to reta in ing them in good order. But in

t he Chinese Nos . and ( 5 ) have the fol low ing

a rrangemen t of the characters By-ca uses-n ot—destroyed

1 p . 24 .

DA S A P A D A RTH I ; NOTE S , I I . 1 : SUBS TA NCE,5 1 93

( or) n ot-by-causes-n ot-destroyed n ot-u ltima te

‘par

ticu la rs (or ) u ltima te-particu lars and ,n ot-spherica l

( or) spherica l I n N O . ( 3) the pos i t ion of the

n ega tive particl e agrees w ith the case o f be ing eterna l

and non-eterna l a ccord ingly , the order w as not changed .

Nos . ( 4 ) and ( 5 ) were probably changed on th e ana l ogy

O f the latter ha l f of N O .

The la tter texts Show tha t the order w as recovered

when the m i sreading and fa i lure of s ense had been

noti ced . But number ( 3) d id not n eed to be changed,

because the m ean ing i s cl ea r and has no absurd i ty .

N umber ( 4 ) w as not cl ea rly understood and rema ined as

it w as . The comm en tari es on (4 ) ha ve strange explanat i ons .

Consequently , the correct m ean ing i s obta in ed when we

reverse the order in the former texts except

P r. E h. men t ion s tha t “ independency (an tis’

rita tva )and “ etern i ty ”

are common to a ll th e n ine substan ces

w ith the exception of avayavi-dravya

1( i.e .

“ effects

Independen cy has th e same m ean ing as“ they do not

inhere in another substance , or they have no subst rata

(adra vyava t or a dravya ) A vaya vi-dravya is substances

“ con s ist ing O f pa rts

Chapter i i ( 1 , 2) expla ins tha t th e n ine substances are

not destroyed by the i r effects,and here i t i s stated tha t

the n ine substances , wh ich are non-products,are not

destroyed by the i r causes . The t w o passages agree w i th

Icarya-karana -avirodhitva in P r. E h. But the treati se

further m en tion s that th e four substan ces as products are

somet imes destroyed by the i r causes . Thi s i s not sta ted

in V .S . Cf . Nyaya -kanda li , p . 21,

“ dra vyani tu na

karyena vinaSyante na-api karanena-i t i karya-karana

a virodhin i n ityanar'

n karana -v inaSayor abhavad e va

karanena-avinaSah anitya-dravyanam karana-vinaSayoh

sambhave’p i karanena na V ina-Sal; k iI

‘

n tv-anyenafiit i

vivek ah.

1 p. 21 . A s t o a vaya vi-dra vya see N yfiya

-koéa ,p . 79.

O

1 94‘ V A I S E S I K A PH I LOSOPHY

U l timate parti culars ” i s l i tera l ly “ ext reme-ha v ing

part iculars,or end possessing spec i es in Ch inese .

E xt reme ha v ing parti cula rs i s hardly in tel l igi bl e .The or igina l Ch inese must have been “ ha v ing-extreme

part iculars wh ich i s the t rans lation of au lya -vis’

esa-va t,

or simply au lya-vis

’

esa .

The author O f the treati se fol lows P r. E h. in the present

passage and expla in s the u lt imat e parti cu lars ether,t ime

,

spa ce,self , m ind ,

and atom s.

S pher i c i ty has been expla ined .

6 . S ubstan ces and S en se-organ s (p . 1 03 )

The descript ion in th i s passage d i ff ers from V .S . and

agrees wi th P r. E h. T he latter states tha t the five

substances,earth

,wa ter

,fire

,w ind

,and ether

,ha ve the

common properties of be ing el em en t s (bhuta tua ) , and O f

be ing the mat er ia l causes of the sen s e-organ s ( indriya

prahrtitva ) , and ha ve the particu la r a ttr ibut es of be ing

perce i ved by the respect i v e sense-organ s (bahya -cha ika

indriya-grahya

-viéesa -guna va ttva ) .1

V .S . says tha t “ in the organ of smel l earth i s th e

materia l cause , ina smuch as it possesses p lura l i ty and

sme l l and in l ike mann er water,fire

,and wind

,are the

mat er ia l causes of the organs O f tast e,s ight

,and touch .

3

But as to sound and th e organ of hear ing V .S . d i ffers from

P r . E h. and th e treat i se . S ound i s an Obj ect (artha ) which

i s perce i ved by the ear and i s the mark of ether ; but the

relation between ether and sound i s d i fferen t from tha t

between earth,etc . , and smel l , e tc. I n the la tter cas e the

substances and the attr ibutes are percei ved a t the same

t ime,whi l e in the former ca se sound i s perce i ved , but

1 p . 22. But the K irand va li explains the last property a tra vivak sa’

bhedena bahya-ek a-ek a-indriya-grahya-gunavat tvam bahya-indriyagrabya

-viéesa-gunavat tvamca-it i bodhavyarii (p . Furt her, P r. E h.

says , érotrampunah sravan a-v iva t a-sarii jnak o nabbo-deéah (p.

2 8 , 2 , 5 , bhuyast vad gandhava t t vac ca prthivi gandha-jnane(i. e . ghrana

-indriye ) prak rt ih .

”

3 8,2, 6 . S ee N . S . 3 , l , 63.

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

1 96 V A I S E S I K A PHIL OS OPHY

but flu id i ty in earth and fire could no t be intr ins i c

a ccord ing to P r. E h. and the treat i se .

S ect ion 2 .— A ttribu te (pp . 1 05 — 1 3 )

1 . A ttribu tes P ercep tible an d I mpercep tible (pp . 1 05 —6 )

P erceptible”

,in th i s passage i s ra ther “ obj ect O f

perception (pra tya lcsa -visaya ) . Cf . notes on ch . i , 3 , 6 .

A s for the percept i b i l i ty of colour , tas t e , smel l , and

t ouch,V .S . says tha t they are perceptibl e in cons equence

of inhes ion in more than one substance (an elca -dra vya

sama vd yat ) and of parti cula r i ty of colour , etc .

lP r. E h.

is O f the same Op in ion .

2 A n cha -dra vya has the same

m ean ing as ma ha t,which i s appl i ed to ternary a tom i c

c ompounds and so forth in P r . E h. and the presen t

trea t ise . Con sequen tly,the four a ttr ibutes res i d ing in

a tom s and binary a tom i c compounds are not percepti bl e .

I n V . S . maha t -i s no t cl ea rly expla in ed,whether it i s

appl i ed to the aggrega te of three atom s , etc ., or to the

aggregate O f two a toms . A ccord ing to P r. E h. and

the trea t i se th e former case i s correct . V .S . begin s

the explanat ion O f exten sion s w ith the sutra“ karana

bahut vac ca”

.

3 Bahu corresponds to m aha t and a n cha .

Then fol lows the sutra“a to v iparitam anu A nu in

th i s sutra does not m ean an a tom,but sma l l ( an exten s i on ) ,

which i s appl i cabl e to binary atom i c compounds . A ccord

ingly bahu ,and m aha t too ,

must be from three upwa rds,

though an cha may l ogica l ly be from tw o upwa rds,

because i t seems to be con trad i ctory to eka . Therefore

the four a t tr ibutes O f binary atom i c compounds are

impercept ibl e .

But th ere are d i ff erent op in ion s . V a su in hi s commen tary

on the Sa ta -s’

astra sta tes tha t the aggregat es of tw o a toms

are percept ible , and Dharma-pala refut es the V ais’

esik a

theory as fol lows

1 4 , -10.

2 p . 186.

3 7, l , 9.

DA S A P A DA R TH I ; NO TE S , I I . 2 : A T'

I‘

R I BUT E,I 1 97

I f products ha v e the sam e quan tity as the ir causes

a tom s) , they cannot be ca l l ed gross th ings , s ince a toms

are not named gross,and the colour , etc .

,of th e product s

are

’

not perce i v ed by the eyes . Thi s i s contrad ictory to

your theory .

” 1

A ccord ing to th e comm entators product m ean s th e

binary a tom i c compounds,because t hey . are sta ted to

be the imm ed iate effects of a tom s . A ccord ingly ,

“ your

theory ”must be the Op in i on tha t binary atom ic compound s

are percept ible . K w hei-c i a l so says that th e or igina l a toms

are not perceptible , but b inary a tom i c compounds , etc . ,are

perceptibl e . Th i s i s not in a ccordan ce w i th our treati se

but th e Op in ion w as probab ly der i v ed from Dha rma

pala’

s work . E ven among la ter V a iSesik a s som e teachers

l ike Mahadeva Bha t ta hol d tha t binary a tom ic compounds

are not supersen suous (a tindriya ) .2

S ound is di fferen t from th e four a ttr ibutes , and i s in

P r . Bh.

3 ca l l ed momen tary and con t inuous . The theory

O f tw o qua l i ti e s O f sound w as probably due to Buddh is t

influence . The four a ttr ibutes need corporea l substances ,and are somet im es perceptibl e and som etimes imper

ceptible ,accord ing to the k inds of the i r subst rata

,wh i le

sound has no such d i fferences and on ly n eeds an empty

space . There may be sound wh ich has not reached the

ear,but i t is not becaus e sound resi des iii a specia l e ther .

Consequently,

soun d must be heard,i f i t reaches to

the ear. S ee P r . E h. p . 288,quoted in the not es on

ch . i i , 3 ,4

,5 .

Concern ing number,extens i on

,ind iv idua l ity

,conjunc

t ion , d isjuncti on , pr ior i ty ,and posteri ori ty V .S . says tha t

they are v is ibl e (caksu sa ) , when they res i d e in coloured

substances (rup i-dravya -sama vayat ) , but inv i s ibl e when

they do not reside in such .

‘1 Rup i-dra vya

-sama vd ya is

1s nap ti

-md tra td -sv’

ddhi-sd stra,p . 3a .

2 A’

ydya-kosa , p . 35 0.

3 pp. 287-8 .

1 4, 1 , 1 1

—12.

1 98 V A I S E S I K A PH IL OS OPHY

the n ecessary cond i t ion,and the substra ta must be

compounds of more than ( two or) three a toms . P r. E h.

adds flu id i ty,v i sc id i ty , and impetus (a part of impress ion )

to these a t tr ibutes .1

Gra v i ty i s imperceptibl e (apra tyaksa ) or supersen suous

(a tindriya ) a ccord ing to P r. E h.

2and the Upashara .

3

But all the extan t t exts of the trea ti se have gra v i ty

between v i scid ity and impetus in th is passage . K w hei-c i

says,

“ The text ( the Ch in ese t ranslation or the origina l

S ansk rt t ext) does not m en t ion grav i ty in th i s passage ;but gra v ity may be an obj ect O f perception ,

because the

a ttr ibute i s a common a ttr i bute of water and earth,as

seen in chapter i i ( i , From h i s sta temen t i t i s seen

tha t the S ansk rt text and the translation by Yuan

Chwang had not enumerated gra v i ty in th i s passage .

C‘-ceu (Ch i-shu) , the th ird pa tr iarch of the Fé -hsiang

tsung , commen ting on K w h é i-c i ’s commentary , says , The

commentary states tha t the text does not men tion gra v i ty

in th i s pa ssage . Thi s assertion i s due to the fact tha t

the author of the commen tary had con sul ted a corrupt

text,s ince the presen t text , which I hav e consul ted , has

the mention of gra v i ty in th e passage . Consequently,

gra v i ty must be cons i dered as percept i bl e and imperceptibl e

a ccord ing to the The corruption in the

Chinese tran slat ion took place in the interva l between

K w hei-c i and C ‘-ceu. K w hé i-ci ’s Opin ion on grav ity i s

not correct , accord ing to P r . E h. and the presen t treat ise .

But grav i ty has been d ifferen tly expla ined . The Upa shara

states tha t V a llabhacarya i s o f Op in ion that gra v i ty i s'

perce i v ed by touch .

3

A s for cogn i t ion,etc .

, P r . E h. says,

“ buddhi-sukha

1 p . 187.

2 pp . 263, 98.

3 O n 4 , I , 10.

1 Commen t ary N O . 10, p . 206 . S ee N ydya-kos’a , p . 238. V a llabhacarya

is somet imes ca l led V at sa and the author Of the L ild va ti, a commentaryon P r. E h.

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

200 V A I S E S I K A PH IL O S OPHY

and that there i s on ly one substance .1 “ E arth in thi s

passage represents combust t erren e a tom s . The V a is’

esik a

i s ca l l ed the P i lu-p dka -vdda and ma in ta in s that com

bust ion takes place in a tom s . Thi s theory i s d ifferen t

from the P itkara-paha-vada ( th e Nyaya ) , which holds that

combustion occurs in an ea rthen pot as a whol e: Terren ea tom s are combust ibl e

,and the i r four attr ibutes are

therefore products . V .S . says tha t “the colour , taste ,

smel l,and touch of earth

,etc. , ina smuch as substances are

non-eterna l , are a l so non-eterna l and by th i s i s decla red

the i r e tern i ty in th ings eterna l ( etena n ity e su nitya tvam

uk tam ) By th i s the four a ttr i butes in earth are k nown

in some cases to be eterna l and non-products . A ccord ing

to the Up aslcara the V rtti replaced the latter sutra by

n ityesv-anityatvam uk tam The V rtti m eans tha t the

four a ttr ibutes in earth d isappear on i ts d i sjunction from

fire,so that the four attr ibutes in both raw and combust

terren e atoms are a l together non-eterna l . T he author

of the trea t i se i s probably fol low ing'such an op in ion

when he sta tes that th e four a tt r ibutes are ,when

possessed by earth,a l together products . “ P roduct ” i s

a lmost synonymous w ith “non-eterna l as the n ext

subsection (3 ) proves . Things are non-eterna l and

products as we l l , when they have been produced ; but

they are not products be fore hav ing been produced , e v en

though n on-eterna l . Therefore ea rth i.e . t erren e

a toms,must m ean th ings produced by combustion ,

because

th i s subsect ion t rea t s of a ttr ibute s as products . But in

th e n ext subsect ion (3)“ ea rth i s to be understood a s

imply ing both raw and combust terren e a toms . Theauthor does not a l lude to the eterna l and non-produceda ttri butes o f earth perhaps he thought the four a ttributes

of earth are a l together non-eterna l , and accord ingly

1 7, 1 , 6—7.

2 7, 1 , 2-3,“

prthivy-ad i-rupa-rasa-gandha-sparsa dravya-anitya t vad

anityas'

ca .

”

D A S A P A DA R TH I ; NOTE S , I I . 2 : ATTR IBUTE , 2 201

products . Th is i s not str i ctly correct,and i s in con s i sten t

w ith th e op in i on s of the authors O f V .S . and P r . E h.

Colour,ta ste

,touch

,flu id i ty and v i sc id i ty , when inheren t

in aqueous a toms , are non-products , because V .S . says “ the

four a ttr i butes are eterna l in water , fire , and wind , ina s

much as the substances are eterna l From binary

a tom i c compounds upwa rds substan ces are non-eterna l and

products ; therefore the i r a t tr i butes a lso are non-eterna l

and products,s ince V .S . says tha t in th ings non-eterna l

they ( the a ttributes) are non-eterna l , because the substan ces

are non-eterna l . There i s n o ment ion of smel l in th i s

paragraph,wh ich shows that the passage refers to

vva ter.

A s to gra v ity P r. E h. says , gurut vasya ca-apad i

paramanu rupa -adivan n itya anityat va n ispat tayah.

”2

Gra v i ty i s expla in ed in l ike mann er ” refers to th e

paragraph on wat er. Cf . V .S . 2 , 1 , 2 ; P r. E h. ,pp . 264-6 .

A ll the extan t texts of the trea tis e have in th i s

paragraph the fol low ing additi on :“ E tern i ty and non

etern ity are expla in ed as in ' th e ca se o f products and

non-products .”

But th i s i s probably superfluous,because

there i s a spec ia l paragraph in th e n ex t subsect i on ( 3) for

etern i ty and non-etern i ty . A ccord ingly the add iti on i s

om i tted in th e tran slat ion and in th e ed it ion O f th e

Ch inese t ext .

Fluid ity in earth and fi re i s sta ted in V .S . as“ fluidi ty

,

through conjunction with fi re , O f cla r ified butter , lac and

w ax i s common to them and wa ter ”

,and “ flu id i ty

,

through conjun ct ion with fire,of t in ,

l ead,i ron

,s i l ve r

,

and gold i s common to them wi th water ” 3 P r . E h. a l so

sta te s tha t earth and'

fire ha ve the inc iden ta l fluid i ty

(n a im itti/ca-drava tva S ee P r. E h.,pp . 264—5 .

1 7, 1 , 4 , apsu t ejas i vayan c a n itya dravya-nitya t vat .”

2 p . 263 , T he etern i ty and non-eterni ty o f t h is (grav i ty ) are expla inedin the same manner as t hose o f the colour, e t c . , in aqueous a toms

, e tc .

”

1 2 1 , 6—7.

1 p. 25 .

202 V A I S E S I K A PH I L OS OP HY

Concern ing the rema in ing paragraphs see P r . E h.

pp. 1 1 1

3 . A ttribu tes E terna l and N on -eterna l (p . 1 06 )

A ll the a ttr ibutes are non-eterna l , when they res ide in

non-eterna l substances .1 K w h é i-c i expla ins , A mong the

twen ty-four a ttributes cogn i t ion,pleasure

,pa in , desi re ,

a vers ion ,effort

,m er i t

,demeri t , impression ,

d isjun ction ,

priority,posterior i ty

,sound

, and sm el l— these fourteen

a ttr ibutes are non-eterna l . S mel l , which abides in earth

on ly,i s a l together non-eterna l

,e ven when i t res ide s in

terren e a toms , as the t ext ( chap . i i , 2 , 7 , and chap . i i , 5 , 3 )a sserts . T he other ten a ttributes are e ither eterna l or

non-eterna l ; but colour , ta ste sme l l , and touch possessed

by earth are non-eterna l , etc .

4 . V arying P ercep tibility of A ttribu tes (p . 107)

P r. E h. states tha t sound , touch , colour , taste , and sm el l

are se vera l ly perce i ved by one sen se-organ , and number,

extens ion,ind i v i dua l i ty , conjun ct i on , d isjunct i on ,

prior ity,

poster ior i ty,flu id ity

,v i scid i ty , and impetus are perce i ved

by two sense-organs ( the sight and the touch-organ ) ;but cognition , ,pleasure ,

pa in,des i re

,a vers ion

,and effort

are perce i ved by the in terna l organ (an tah-karana ,

i.e . m an as) , whi le gra v i ty ,mer i t

,demer i t

, and menta l

impress ion are supersensuous .2 The treat ise does not

m ent ion cogn it ion,etc . , down to m en ta l impress ion

,

because these are not perceived by any sen se-organ s .

M ind i s not in the treat i se ca l l ed an tah-hara na ( see

ch . i i,2

,

The texts of the commen tar i es Nos . 9 and 1 0 ha ve ,in th i s paragraph , gra v ity betw een posteri or i ty and

flu id ity but K w hé i—c i remark s that the organ O f touch

perce i ves the e l e ven a ttr i butes,i.e . touch ,

number,

exten s ion , ind i v idua l i ty , conjun ct ion ,di sjunction

,pr iority

,

1 7, 1 , 2—4 ; 7, 1 , 18—20.

2 pp. 96-8.

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

2 04 V A I S E S I K A PHI L OSOPHY

gandha spars’

a -parimana-ek atva ek aprthak tva gurutva

dra va t va-sneha vegah karana guna purvak ah. Un i ty

and ind i v idua l ity hav e not as the i r causes a ttributes other

than cogn i t i on .

( 6— 8 ) S ee th e defin i t ion of ext ens i on and the notes

thereupon .

(9— 1 0) P erception and in ference are equa l ly d i v id ed

into four sorts : doubtfu l deci s i v e (n irnaya ) ,imperfect (a c idyci ) , and perfect knowledge (vidya) .

V .S . m ent ion s san'

i s’

aya ,n irnaya , smrti

,svapna ,

svapn d n tika , oidyd ,a vidya , and arsa -siddha-dars

'

a n a ,

2

besides cogn i t ion . P r. E h . d i v i des cogn i t i on in to oidyd

and a vidya. The la tt er con t a ins sa ins’

a ya , viparya ya

( con trary or con trad i cti on ) , an adhgava saya ( indecis i v e) ,and svapn a (-j nd n a wh i l e

.th e former is perception

,

in feren ce, (n irnaya ) , smrti

,and area -s iddha -darsan a .

3

V iparyaya and an a dhya va saya are n ot men t ioned in

V .S .,though c ipdrgaya i s sa id ,

by the commen ta tors ,4

to be the sam e as a vidya. These two are enum era t ed

in P r . E h. on the ana logy of the ca se o f in ference . I n

our trea t is e smrti i s included in impress i on ,and svapn a ,

svapnan tiha arsa -siddha -dars’

an a are om i t ted .

( 1 1 ) S amsa ya in V .S . i s caused by perception of a

genera l,non-percept ion o f a particular; and remembrance

of par t icula r i ty,

and by knowl edge and want of

knowl edge .

5

P receded by the percepti on of propert i e s common

1 p. 98 ,“ Co lour, taste, smel l

,and t ouch , when not produc ed by

combust ion , exte ns ion , uni ty , s ingle ind iv idua l ity , grav ity , fl uid i ty,

v isc id ity , and impet us are pre ced ed (or originated ) by ( l ike ) a t tribut esin t heir (re spect ive) causes .

2 S ee not es on ch . ii, 3, 22—3 (merit and demerit ) .

3pp . 172 , 186 .

5 2 , 2 , 17, samanya-pra t y aksad v i sesa-apra tyak sad v iéesa-smrt es ca

samSayah . 2 , 2 , 20,“ v idya-avidyat as ca san

'

i Sayah . T he first t hreecases are explained by drstafi c a drstava t and ya tha-d rst am ayatha

d rs ta tvac ca”(2 , 2 , 18 S ee 10, l , 3 .

D A S A P A DA R TH I ; NOTES , II . 2 : ATTR IBUTE , 5 205

to more than one obj ect corresponds to perception of

a genera l ( samanya but the whol e defin i tion

i s more s imi lar to N .S . ,

“ samana-amek a-dharma-upapat t i

vis’

esa-apek so v imars’

ah,

” 1and to i ts Bhd sya ,

“ samana

dharma-upapa t ter v iSesa-apek so v imarSah sar'

nSayah

k ir'

n s v i d i ty-anya taran na-avadharayati tad-anavadha

ranar‘

n j fianam vimarSah) samSayah.

”

( 1 2) V .S . has no men tion of the nature of n irnaga ,

wh ich i s sa i d to be produced ,l ike sani s

‘

aga ,

2 by percept i on

and in feren ce .

P r . E h. expla in s i t,

V i sesa-darsana-j am avadharana

j nanam sar’

nSaya-v irodhi n irnayah.

” 3

( 1 3- 1 4 ) A s to vidya and a vidya ,V .S . expla ins that

imperfect cogn i t ion resul ts from derangemen t O f the

organ s o f sen se and from defect in impress i on th i s i s

d efecti v e cogn i ti on,

”and “ free from de fect i t i s perfect

cogn i t i on ‘1

“ P receded by the perception,e tc . , impl ies contact

of the four factors and i s th e ind irect cause of the four

sorts of percept ion,wh i l e “ contact of se l f w ith m ind ”

i s the specia l and d irect cause .

( 1 5 ) The four sorts are a l so enum erated w ith regard to

in ference, and th i s i s correct , because sams

’

aya and n irnaya

a re produced by percep t i on and in ference , and vidya

and avidya relat e to sense—organ s ( i.e percept ion ) and

impress io‘

n ( rem in i scence in ference ) .

( 1 6— 1 7) S ee the not es on ch . i , 2,9 ; ch . i i

,2,1

,and 4

V .S . 3,1,

The descrip t ion agrees w i th P r . E h. p . 1 86

and V .S . 4 ,1 , 1 1 ; 8 ,

1,4 . The trea t i s e m en ti ons the

a ction s wh i ch res ide in earth ,wa ter

,and fi re on ly

,because

1 l , 1 , 23 .

l , 3.

3 p . 25 5 , N irnaya is the ascertained knowledge brough t abou t by thed ue percept ion o f part icularity and is opposed to samSaya .

1 9 , 2 , 10—12 , ind riya

-dosat san’

l skara-dosac ca-av idya, ” t ad d a s ta

jnanam , and “adustamv idya”

.

5 Cf . Candra-kd ntw bhd sya .

206 V A I S E S I K A PHIL OSOPHY

in wind a ct ion i s in v is ible,but the touch of w ind i s o f

course percept ibl e . E x i stence re late s to substances,

a ttributes, and a ctions,and i s percept i bl e

,if the substrata

are perceptible . “O f exi stence , commonn ess , poten t ia l ity ,

and non-poten t ia l i ty ,with the exception of the potentia l i ty

,

non-poten t ia l i ty ,and sound-ness wh ich are inheren t in

sound refers to the n ext paragraph . S ound i s percept ibl e,

but i t i s not perce ived by conta ct of the four factors .Commonness

,poten t ia l i ty ,

and non-poten tia l i ty are not

stated in V .S . and P r . E h. , but V .S .

“samanya

-viSesesu

samanya-v iSesa-abhavat tata (i.e . dravyata ) e va jnanam”

,

and samanya-viSesa apek sam dra vya—guna -k armasu

1

may be regarded as th e exp lanation of commonness and

P r . E h. bhava dravyat va gunatva k arma t va adinam

upa labhy adhara samav etanam aSraya grabakair indri

ya i r grahanam” 2 i s the explana tion of i t. P oten tia l i ty

and non-pot ent ia l i ty are treated jus t as in the ca se of

commonn ess,because these three categor ies equa l ly relate

to the first three cat egor ies . The cogn i t ion s of th em are

produced by contact of the four factors .

A ll the extant texts o f the treati se have grav i ty between

post eri or i ty and fluid i ty ; but th i s , as stated in th e notes on

ch . i i,2

,1,and 4

,i s not correct.

( 1 8 ) S ee notes on ch . i i,1,4 . P r. E h. states

,s'

abdasya

(pra tyak sam) traya-sannik arsac chrotra-samavetasya t ena

e va-upalabdhih.

” 3 S ound-n ess i s , of course , a kind of

commonn ess , and“ ex i stence ” i s the cause of the notion

tha t sound i s ex i stent . Thi s sort of cogn i t ion resul ts from

contact of the three factors .

1 8 , 1 , 5 -6 , Inasmuch as in un l versal ity and part icularity there ex istnot universa l ity and part iculari t y , cogn it ion of them resul ts from t ha t

and “(cogn it ion ) of subs ta nces , at tributes , and act ions

supposes un iversa l ity a nd part iculari ty2 p . 187.

3 p . 187,“(T he percept ion of ) sound resul ts from: '

contact of the

t hree fac tors , and , being inherent in the ear, it is perce ived by the ear

a lone.”

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

208 V A I S E S I K A PH ILOSOPHY

Imperfect percept ion a s a caus e of des i re and a vers i on

is pecul ia r to th e trea t is e . Improper des i re and a v ers ion

resul t from wan t o f perfec t knowledge and .cause t rans

m igra t i on .

( 23 ) P r . E h . expla in s tha t des i re and a vers i on are the

causes o f e ffort , remembrance , meri t , and dem eri t , and

effort i s of t w o sorts, j ivana -purvaka and iccha-duesa

p arvaha . The former is tha t which makes breath ing

out and in of a sl eeper to be cont inua l , and is the cause

of conjun ct i on of the interna l organ with other sense

organs a t the mom en t of awaken ing ; th i s sort of eff ort

i s produced by conjunct ion of sel f w i th m ind,

a ided

by m eri t and demerit j w hile the la tter i s the cause of

exert ion for obta in ing agreeable th ings and abandon ing

d isagreeabl e t h ings , and i t a l so l eads to suppress ion of

the body ; it i s produced by conjun ction O f s el f w ith

m ind,a ided by desire or by a vers ion .

1 The inst in ct to

l i ve corresponds to j iua na . The treat i se in th i s paragraph

i s an abridgmen t of P r . E h.

( 24 ) S ee P r. E h. v ego n iInit ta-v iSe sa-apek sat k armano

jaya t e n iyata -d ik -k riya-prabandha -hetuh”

.

2 V .S . says

tha t impetus i s an effect of act ion ,and the first a ct i on of

an a rrow is from impul s ion,the n ext i s from th e impress ion

impetus) caused by tha t a ct ion ,and in l ik e mann er the

n ext and th e n ext 3

( 25 ) V .S . sta tes tha t act i v i ty in mer i t or dem eri t has

for its an tecedent s des ire and P r . E h. says ,m er i t i s produced by conjunct ion of the man ( = sel f)

1 pp . 261—3 , j ivana-pi‘

l rvak ah supt asya prana-apana-san tana -prerak ah

prabodha-

‘

kale c a-an tahk aranasya-indriya

-an t ara-prapt i-he tuh , asya

j ivana-purvak asya atma-manasoh samyogad dharma-adharma-apek sad

u tpa t t ih ,”and “ itaras ( i. e . iccha-dvesa-purvak as ) t u h it a-ab it a-prapt i

parihara-samarthasya vyaparasya he tuh Sarira-v idharakas ca se atma

manasoh samyogad icoba-apek sad d vesa-apek sad v é -htpadya t e2 p . 266 , see note s on oh . i, 3 , 2 1 ( impression ) .'1 5 , l , 17, nodanad adyam isoh k arma t a t-karma-karitac ca samskarad

u t t aramt at ha-u t ta ram ut t aran ca .

”

1 6 , 2 , 14 , iccha-d vesa-purv ika d harma-ad harma-pravrt t ih .

D A S A P A DA R TH I ; NOTE S,I I . 2 : ATT R IBUTE

, 5 209

w ith the in terna l organ and pure in tenti on con

j unction o f se l f w i th m ind,when a i ded by a ll these

a ccessori e s (deta i l ed above, i.e . the observance of the

four periods of l i fe , etc ) , fol lowed without a moti ve f or

ga in ing thereby any v i s ibl e resul ts , and by tranqu i l d is

pos i tion,tends to bring about m eri t

,

”

and “ i ts (dem er i t’s)

c auses are ( 1 ) the do ing of a ct ions wh ich are proh ibited

in the scriptures , and wh ich are contrary to the causes o f

m eri t , ( 2) the non-performan ce o f action s enj o ined ( in th e

scri ptures) , and ( 3 ) ca re lessness ; demer i t i s produced by

conjunct ion of sel f w ith m ind,caused by these ( three

a ccessori es) and ev i l int enti on”

.

1 Cf . V .S .

“ drsta-adrs ta

prayoj ananar'

n drsta-abhave prayoj anam abhy udayaya”

,

2

a nd “ dustar’

n himsayam”

,and 6 , 1 , 5 —1 6 ; 6 ,

2,1—9 ;

10 ,2,8 .

The la tter part of th i s pa ragraph may be paraphra sed

a s fol l ows : “ Caused by hea r ing and reflecting that

m er i t brings about a pure s t a te in the future l i fe,or

caused by d i sregarding the fact tha t mer i t brings about

a pure sta te in the future l i fe ; and caused by hea ring and

reflecting tha t d emer i t br ings about an impure sta te in

the future l i fe , or caused by di sregard ing the fa ct tha t

demer i t brings about an impure stat e in th e future l i fe .

( 26 ) V .S . says that“ rem in i scence resul ts from a part i cular

conjunction o f sel f wi th m ind ,and from impress ion ”

.

3

Cf . th e defin ition of the cause of rem in i scence .

( 27 ) V .S . 2 ,2, 3 1 , and P r . E h.,

p . 287.

( 28 ) O f . P r. E h. ,

“a va rua-lak sano ( Sabdo )

’

p i bheri

danda -samyoga -apek sad bhery-akasa-samyogad utpad

1 pp . 272—80,“ dharmah puruS a

-an tahk arana-samyoga-viSuddhaabhisandhijah d rstan

’

i prayojanam anudd iéya-etam sad hanani

bhava-prasadamca-apek sya-atma-manas oh samyogad dharma-utpa t t ih,

”

and “t asya (adharmasya ) tu sadhanani sastre pra t isiddhani dharma

sadhana-v iparitan i (himsa-aort a-s teyad in i) v ihita-ak aranam pramadas'

c a-e tan i d us ta-abh isandhil ii ca-apek sya-atma -manasoh samyogad adhar

masya-utpat t ih

2

3 9 , 2 , 6 .

210 V A I S E S I K A PH ILOSOPHY

y ate . I n (a region of ) ether or w ith (a region

of) ether“ A ccompan i ed by impetus , which causes the

conj unction of the substan ces may be“a ccompan i ed by

impetus , which i s conjunct w i th substances ”

,but th e

former read ing i s bet ter . Cf . the n ext paragraph .

( 29) O f . P r . E h.,

“ v enu-pa r va-v ibhagad v env-akas’ avibhagac ca .

” 1 “ In (a region of) ether or “ from

( a region of ) ether

(30) O f . P r. E h.,

“ Sabdac ca samyoga-v ibhaga-nispannadv ic i-santana vac Chabda-san tana it i.” 1

6 . A ttribu tes a biding in on e S ubstan ce,etc. (pp . 1 1 0— 1 1 )

P r. E h. says tha t conjunct ion,d i sjunct i on

,dua l i ty and

dua l ind i v idua l i t i es,etc . ,

ha v e more than one substance a sthei r subs tra ta

,wh i l e each o f the other a ttr ibutes ex i st s

in a s ingl e substan ce (e/ca iha -dra vya -vrtti) and further,

that colour,t a st e

,smel l t ouch

,v i sc id i ty

,in t rin si c flu id i ty

,

cognit ion,pleasure

,pa in

,des ire

,a v ers ion

,effort

,m erit

,

dem eri t,m enta l impress ion

,and sound are the pa rt i cu la r

a ttr ibutes o f d efin i te substan ces (c a is’

esika -guna ) , wh i le

number,extens ion

,ind i v idua l i ty

,conjuncti on

,di sjunct i on ,

prio ri ty,poster iori ty ,

gra v i ty,ext r ins i c flu id i ty and

impetus are a ttr ibut es common t o more than on e

substance (samanya -gu na ) .2

Impress ion ” ’ i s the cause of rem in i scen ce and “ impetus

i s the caus e of a ctions ; both make on e impress i on,so tha t

“thes e twenty-one a ttri but es ”

must be “these t w en t V

‘

a tt ributes

7 . A ttribu tes p ervad ing an d n ot p ervading their

S ubstra ta (p . 1 1 1 )

P r. E h. states that conj unct i on , d isjunction , sound , and

the spec ia l a ttr ibutes o f se l f ex i st in a part of the i r

respect i ve substrata (pra des’

a -vrttitva ) , wh i l e all oth er

a tt ributes pervade the i r respect i ve subs trata ( ot s‘

raya

vyap titva ) .3

1 p . 288.

2 pp. 95 —6 .

3 pp. 102-3.

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

2 1 2 V A I S E S I K A PH IL OSOPHY

cogn i t i on down to sound , are momen ta ry .

1 S ee Nyaya

hos’

a,pp . 1 96—7 , 2 .

( 3) P r . E h. sta tes “

(dharmo)’

n tya -sukha-samvijnana

v irodhi”

.

2 “ Its effect,i.e . pl easure

,

” relates to pra vrtti

dharma ,and “ perfect cogn i ti on ” to n ivrtti-dharma .

Cf . ch . i,3,22— 3 (meri t and dem eri t ) .

(4 ) P r. E h. says (adharmo )’

n tya-duhkha-samv ij flana

v irodhi”

.

3

( 5 — 6 )“ Impress ion s are the causes of rem in i scence

and do not include the causes o f act ion s . Cf . P r . E h.

“ bhavana-samj fiak ah smrti-pratyabhij fiana -hetur

bhava t i jnana-mada-duhk had I

( 8— 1 2) These paragraphs are persp icuous .

( 1 4 ) This i s not c lea r . The commen tators expla in

t hat “the substances possess ing touch m eans bodi es .

A ccord ing to other passages p leasure and pa in are not

t he d i rect causes of effort , but des i re and a vers ion are

the effects o f pl easure and pa in and th e d irect causes

of eff ort. E ffort and pa in may be in conjunct ion wi th

a body and not be dest royed by the cause or the e ffect,

that i s , th e two a ttr ibutes can ex i st a t the same t ime .

( 1 5 ) The cause of rem in iscence i s the impress ion of

cogn i t i on ,and pa in i s the immed ia te effect of dem eri t .

They may ex ist a t the same time . P r . E h. says

at it esu sarpa-vyaghra-cauradisu smrti-j am

The treati se does not clearly m ent ion th i s .

( 1 6—1 7) P r . E h. states , vego mfirtimatsu pancasu

dra vy esu nimitta -viSesa -apek sat k armano jaya te

sparsa vad-dra vya —samyoga viSesa -v irodhi. Impetus i s

dest royed by a k ind of conjunction,but not by its effect .

1 p . 25 .

2 p . 272.

3 p . 280.

p . 266 , Wha t is ca lled menta l impress ion is the cause of remembranceand recogn it ion and is destroyed by k nowledge, int ox ica t ion ,

pa in , e t c .

”

5 p . 260,“ P a in is prod uced by the remembrance o f snakes , t igers ,

robbers, e t c . (experienced ) in former t imes .

”

DA S A P A DA R TH I ; NOTE S, I I . 2 : ATTR IBUTE, 8 2 13

S ee 5 — 6 . But the cause o f rem in i scen ce and i ts effect,

cogn i t ion,do not co-ex ist .

( 1 8— 1 9) P r . E h. s ta tes tha t priori ty,posteri ori ty

,dua l i ty ,

and dua l ind i v idua l i ty are buddhy-apeksa .

1

( 20 ) Th i s has been expla in ed .

(2 1 ) Conjuncti on and d i sjun ct i on presuppose each other,

but they are no t in the re la t i on of cause and effect .

( 22—2 5 ) V .S . 1 2 ; 1 ,1,1

,27 ; 1 , 1 , 28 .

( 26) Thi s i s the cha racteri st i c o f substances and the i r

a ttr ibutes .

9 . A ttribu tes inhering in S ubstan ces -etc. (p . 1 13 )

S ee the defin i t ion O f a t tr ibute . P r . E h. says tha t

a l l th e a ttr ibutes are included in a ttr ibute-n ess,ha v e

substances as th e i r substra ta,ha ve no a ttr ibutes in

themse l ves,and are

’

inacti v e .

2 Inactiv ity of a ttr ibutes

is sta ted in V .S . 7,1,1 5 ; 7 ,

2, 1 2 ; 7, 2 ,

24—5 . Inheren t

cause i s one of the chara cter isti cs of substances,and non

inheren t cause i s so of attr ibutes .

But P r. E h. s tates tha t gra v ity,flui d i ty ,

impetus , effort,mer i t , demeri t , conjunction ,

and d isjunct i on are the cause s

o f action s (kriyd -hetu ) ; co l our ta ste , smel l , cool touch ,

number , extens ion ,s ingl e ind i v idua l i ty

,v i sc id i ty ,

and

sound are non-inheren t causes ; cogn i t i on ,plea sure

,pa in

,

desi re,aversion ,

e ffort , meri t, demer i t , and men ta l impress ion

are eflicien t causes ; conjunc t ion ,d isjun ct ion , hot touch ,

gra v i ty , fluid ity ,and impetus are both non-inheren t and

e fficien t causes ; and priori ty ,posteri ori ty

,dua l i ty and

dua l ind iv idua l i t ies,etc .

,have not the qua l i ty of be ing

caus e (a ltara na tva ) .2 These d is tincti ons are not s ta ted in

our trea t i se .

S ection 3.— A ction (pp . 1 1 3—1 6 )

1 . A ction s inhering in S ubstan ces , etc. ( pp . 1 1 3— 1 4 )

O f . th e defin i t ion of acti on and P r . E h. utk sepanadinam

pancanam api k armat va-sambandhah, ek a-dravya va t t vam1 p . 99. p . 94 .

3 pp . 101—2.

2 1 4 V A I S E S I K A PH ILOSOPHY

k sanik at vammur ta-dra vya-vrttitvamagunava t t vamguru

t va dra va tva praya tna sar‘

nyoga-j atvam sva karya sam

yoga virodhitvam samyoga v ibhaga n irapek sa-karana

t vam asama vayi-k aranatvam S va-apa ra-aSI'aya -S amave ta

karya-arambhak a -t vam samana-jat iya-anarambhak a tvar‘

n

dra vya -anarambhak a-t va I ’

n ca pra t in iya ta-jat i-yogitvam,

d ig viSiS t a-karya-arambliak a tvam ca v iSesah .

‘

“ A l l inhere in substan ces i s a gen era l statemen t,

wh i l e “they ha v e each on e substance as the i r sub

stratum i s a spec ia l one . The n ext four qua l i t ies agree

wi th P r . E h. and V .S .

A s to“ they are producti v e and products K w hei-c i

remarks that a ct ions are a l together n on-et erna l , because

they are product i v e and products a s wel l ”

Tha t they are non-aggrega te i s known from t he i r

qua l i ty o f be ing destroyed by the ir effect s . They are

s igns of substances,jus t a s a tt ri butes are

,because they

a l w ays inhere in substan ces .

They ha v e causes of the di fferen t cla sses m ean s that

they a lso ha v e no caus es of the sam e class V .S . says that

an action cannot be e ff ected by an a cti on and act ion

because of i ts d i ss im i lar i ty from a t tr ibute is not ( an

effect) of act ion s ” 2

2 . A ction s ha ving S ubs tan ces a s their S ubstra ta (p . 1 1 4 )

A ll of ear th ,wa ter

,fire

,and wind ”

means the four

substan ces a s e ff ect s and causes (atom s ) . The act ion s

contract ing and expand ing cannot abide in a toms and

bina ry a tom i c compounds ; they res ide in ternary a tom ic

compounds,etc .

3 . A ctions p ervad ing their S ubstra ta (p . 1 1 4 )

The author of the t rea t i se re fers to ,and a lmost a ccep ts ,

some other teachers’ op in ion . The opin ion may be just ified

1 p . 290.

2 l,l , 1 1 ,

“ karma k arma-sad hyan'

i n a v idya t e , and l , l , 24 ,

guna-va idharmyan na k armanarh karma .

”

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

21 6 V A I S E S I K A PH ILOSOPHY

( 4 )“ P arts ” i s th e hands

,etc . Concern ing m ind V .S .

says tha t the acti on of m ind i s expla ined by that of the

hand 1

( 5 )“ Conjunction with sel f and tha t of effort (of sel f )

W I th the body ” i s tran slated on th e ana logy of para . 2 ;

but i t may be correct to understand thus : conj unct i on

with the body 2 of effort,wh ich is conjunct wi th sel f .” I n

Chinese there is no Sign of th e dua l or p lural number .

The paragraphs 2 and 5 ha ve no m ention of the ear,

becaus e the sen sa t ion of sound i s pa ss i v e . K Wh é i-c i

expla ins tha t “ when sound is produced in ether,th e sound

causes the percepti ona l fun ct ion in a body Cf . P r . E h. ,

e vam san tanena Srotra-prade Sam agatasya grahanar'

n

s'

ro tra -Sabdayor gamana -agamana -abhavad apraptasya

grahanam nast i .” 3

V .S . sta tes that (“action in the hand i s by w ay o f

conjunct i on with,and effort of

,sel f ”

)“ in l ike mann er ,

and from conjun cti on w i th the hand,i s a ct ion in the

pest l e,

” “ in th e a ction produced in a pestl e and the l ike

by impact conjun ct ion with the hand i s not a cause , being

excluded therefrom,

” “ in l ik e mann er conjunct i on w i th

sel f ( i s not a cause ) in rela t ion to action in the hand ,”and

“ th e acti on in the hand i s from impact,and from con

junction with pestl e ” 4

( 8- 1 1 ) P aragraphs 1— 7 descri be the con sci ous actions,

wh il e these paragraphs m en t i on -the uncon scious a ct ion s

and correspond to V .S . 5 ,1

,7— 1 3

,and P r . E h. , pp . 308—9 .

V .S . says tha t “ in the absen ce of conjunct ion fa l l ing

(pa tan a ) resul ts from grav i ty Gra v i ty is the non

inheren t cause,and the body of a sl eeper i s th e inheren t

cause . There i s the impress ion l e ft by the action fa l l ing ,

1 5 , 2 , 14 .

2 Cf . Upa skrira on 5 , 1 , 1—2.

3 p . 288.

4 5 , 1 , 2—5 ,“t atha hast a-samy ogac ca musa le k arma

,

”abh ighat a je

musaladau k arman i vyat irekad akaranamhasta-sarhyogah, tatha-atma

samyogo hast a-k arman i , ” and abhighatan musa la-samyogad dhast ek arma

”.

5 5 , l , 7, samyoga-abhave gurutvat pat anan'

I .

’

D A S A P A DA R TH I ; NOTES , I I . 3 : A CTION,4 21 7

and th e impress i on and gra v i ty are the non-inheren t

causes for the second a cti on and so forth .

V .S . states tha t mo v emen t ( ca lana ) of a sl eeper takes

pla ce e v en in the absence o f eff ort Cf . P r. E h. ,

prana-ak hye tu vayan ka rma suptasya tu j ivana

purvak a-praya tna-apek sat .

” 2 E ffort ”

in “ conjunction

of cfl ort with sel f ”

i s j ivan a -purvaha in P r . E h. Conse

quen tly the absence of e ffort ”in V .S . is to be understood

l i ke “ the absence of consc ious effort ”

.

( 1 2) From th is paragraph the act ions in nature are

expla ined . These a ct ion s are stated in V .S . 5 , 1 , 1 4 ,

5,2,1 3

,and in P r . E h.

,pp . 303— 7. The explana t i on i s

one of the cha ra cteri st i cs of the system ,and d i st ingui shes

i t from the S amk hya ,th e V edan ta

,and other systems .

V .S . says tha t flowing ( syan dan a ) resul ts from

flui d i ty S ee P r. E h.,p . 302.

( 1 4 ,1 9) V .S . states tha t “ The upwa rd flam ing of fi re , th e

s ideward blowing of w ind,and the first a ct ion of a toms

and of m ind , are caused by destiny (adrs ta )” 1; see

P r. E h. ,p . 309. The conjunct i on of adrsta ( i.e . m eri t

and demeri t) with se l f i s sta ted in P r . E h. ,pp . 4 8— 9.

(1 6 ) O f . V .S . 4 ,2

,1— 5 ( anu-samyogas t v-apra tisiddhah ) ,

and P r. 4 8—9,308— 9 ( ta tha sarga-kal e pratyagrena

s’

arirena sambandhartham k a rma-a

’

drsta-karitam) .

( 1 8) V .S . sta tes tha t “ th e c i rcula t ion (abhisa rpana ) in

trees i s caus ed by destiny” 5(P r . E h.

,pp . 30 5 —6 ,

4 8

( 1 9) Cf. V .S .,

“the egress and ingress ( of m ind from and

in to bod i es) , conjun cti on w ith th ings ea ten and drunk , and

conjun ct i on s w i th o ther eff ects— a ll these th ings are caused

by dest iny .

” 5

1 5 , l , 13 , “

praya tna-abhave pra suptasya ca lanam.

p . 308 .

5 , 2 , 4 ,d ra va t vat syanda nam .

5,2 , 13 ,

“agner I

'

I rdhva-j va lanam vayos t iryak -pavanam anunaiil

manasas ca-adyakarma-adrsta-karitam.

5 5 , 2 , 7,“vrksa-abh isarpanam ity adrsta-karitam .

5 5 , 2 , 17,“apasarpanam upasarpa nam asi ta-pita-samyogah karya

antara-samyogaé ca-ity-ad rsta-karitani.”

2 18 V A I S E S I K A PH ILOSOPHY

( 21 )“ The a ctions in the (presen t) world i s l i tera l ly

ea rth-foot-k a rma”

, which i s in Chin ese n ot a t a l l

in t e l l igible . But it seem s to be the l i t era l tran sla t ion of

bhumi-ta la -karma ( or p rthivi-ta la -ha rma wh ich is

l i tera l ly the act ion s on the surface o f the ea rth ”

.

“ The r ipen ing of the happy and the unhappy effects

i s the tran sla t ion of hita-ahita -vipaka . The comm en tators

say : V ipalca m eans ripen ing ( of effects) d ifl eren t ( from

the i r causes) , tha t i s , m er i t br ings about pl ea sure or good ,

and demer i t br ings about pa in or e v i l Thus the cause

and the effects are O f o

'

differen t cla ss es .

( 23) V .S . sta tes tha t a ct ion in ear th resul t s fromimpul s ion ,

impa ct , and conjunct ion wi th the conjun ct ”

,

“the fall ing of wa ter in the absen ce of conjunct ion resul t s

from gra v i ty ,

” “ the sun ’s rays cause the a scen t of wa te r

through conjunct i on with w ind , through the impress o f

the impu l s ion , and conjunct i on wi th th e conjunct ,” “

par

t icular impu l s ion resu l t s from part i cular effort,

”

and “the

a ct i on of fire and tha t o f,wind are expla in ed by the

a ct i on of earth Cf . P r . E h .,ta tra nodanar

’

n gurutva

dravatva-v ega-prayatnan samas ta-vyastan apek samano yah

samyoga-V ISe so nodanam a v ibhaga-betor ek asya k armanah

k aranamtasmac ca tursv-apimahabhut esu karma bhava ti.” 2

( 24 ) The paragraph Te fers principa l ly to the last para

graph

Gra v i ty does not exi st in fire,

and fluid i ty i s n ot

possessed by w ind .

Wind and mind are not m en t ioned in the last paragraph ,wh ich i s intended to c i te the fi v e corporea l substances .

But m ind has not impul s ion and impact (n odan a and

a bhighata ) ; a ccord ingly i t i s om i tted ini that para graph .

1 5 , 2 , l , nodana-abhighatat sarhyuk ta~samyogac ca prthivyamk arma

”

;

5 , 2 , 3 , apan'i samyoga-abhav e gurut vat pa t anam 5 , 2 , 5 —6 , nadyo

vayu-samyogad arohanam , nodana-apidanat sarhyuk ta-samyogac ca”

; 5 ,

1 , 9, praya t na-v iéesan nodana-v iée sah

”

; and 5 , 2 , 12 ,“

prthivi-karmana

t ejah-k arma vayu-k arma ca vyakhyat am .

”Cf . 5 , l , 8 10 ; 18.

2 p . 303 .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

220 V A I S E S I E A PHILOSOPHY

the t reatise specia l ly m en ti on s the three substan ces,

because i t i s not easy to know tha t the ca t egory inheres

in them .

“ I t ex i st s in e ther,space , and t ime ” does no t

exclude the other s i x substan ces , because the trea t i se

d ist in ct ly s ta tes that the n in e substances ha v e each

pa rt i culari ty .

t y,then

,i s se l f not enumera ted in th i s pa ssage ?

P robably because the author a cknowl edges p lura l i ty of

sel f in regard to it s appearan ces,and consequen tly sel f has

prior i ty and poster i or i ty ( see ch . i i,2, 5 ,

and 8 ch . i i,3

,

O r the aut hor m ay m ean tha t the three substan ces are,

though possess ing n e i ther pr ior i ty nor post eri ori ty ,three

d i st in ct en t i t i es and not on e ent i ty . I f the u l t ima te

particula rs con ta in th e n ine substan ces a s causes,the three

substan ces can n e v er be on e . I n th is conn ex ion the

treati se i s more con sequen t than P r . E h . ( cf . p .

K w hé i-c i remarks,

“ P a r t i cu la r i ty i s n o t percept ibl e , l ike

poten t ia l i ty and n on-poten t ia l i ty ,a l though th e treati se

does not d istin ctly expres s thi s .” But poten t ia l i ty and

non-potent ia l i ty are percep t ibl e or not a ccord ing a s they

inhere in d i fferen t substrata ; see ch . i i,2,5 ( 1 6

A ccord ing to Dharma-pala the fi fth category , un i v ersa l i ty

part i cu la ri ty,i s perceptibl e

,but part i cula ri ty , being

restri cted to the u l t imat e par t i cu la rs , i s impercept ibl e .

The t reat ise does not enum era te inherence,n on-exi st ence ,

and part i cula ri ty among the perceptibl e ca tegori es in

ch . i i ( 2 , 5 ,1 6

S ecti on 6 .

— I nheren ce (p . 1 1 7 )‘

T he cause o f being inheren t i s l i tera l ly producing

reach ing-caus e This is not cl ear . I t may be a tran sla

t i on of ud bhuta -kara na . But thi s S ansk rt I s not sui tabl ef or the passage . P roduc ing-reach ing is probabl y an

equ i va l en t of sani a veta . A ny w ay stress must not be la i d

upon the m ean ing of “ product i on ”

,because inheren ce i s

not at a ll product i v e .

I

Op—lD A S A P A D A R TH I ; NOTES , 11. 6 : I NHERENCE . 2

There is no m ention of inherence and non-ex is tence

among the ca tegor i es in wh ich inheren ce inheres,because

inheren ce does not inhere in i tsel f or in non-ex i st ence .

Inherence i s imperceptibl e,as Dha rma pala s tates .

P r . E h. says , a ta eva-a ti-indriyah sa t tadinam iva pra tya

k sesu vrtty-abhavat sva-atma-gata-samvedana-abhavac ca

t asmad iha buddby-anumeyah samavaya i ti .” 1

Inherence has for mark ( linga or laksana ) th e

recogn i t i on, (of its ex i stence ) has the sam e m ean ing as

P r . E h. Inherence i s the cause O f iha -buddhi and has

a t the sam e t ime iha -buddhi as th e mark of its ex i stence .

The rea l i ty of inherence is rej ected by the V edan ta and

th e Mimamsa.

A S for the other qua l it i es see P r . E h.,pp . 326—8 .

S ections 7—8 .— P oten tia lity and Non -poten tia lity (p . 1 1 7)

“ I t i s som eth ing inheren t in th e categori es , wi th the

e xcept ion o f un ive rsa l i ty,poten t ia l ity

,non-potent ia l i ty ,

commonness,and pa rticu la r i ty ”

shows tha t the fi v e

c a tegor i es are not pi'

oductive ; th e product i v e ca tegories

a re the firs t three ca tegories on ly .

“ The cause of the

not ions i s l i tera l ly “ th e ma rk of the notion s “ The

ma rk ”w as probably suggested by “ inherence has the

ma rk in the last section and took th e place o f“the cause dur ing th e tran sm i ss i on of th e trea ti se by

copy ing. No category can be th e mark of the notion,

and the treat i se does no t u sua l ly use“ th e ma rk in

such a ca se . “ The mark in th e last sect ion i s used

because inherence i s impercepti bl e . Cf . S ection 5 .

S ecti on 9 .—Commonn ess ( p . 1 1 8 )

A S to commonn ess i s one K w hei-c i states that Com

m onness i s man i fold,l ike at tributes

,actions

,parti cula ri t i es

potent ia l i t i es , non-poten t ia l i t ies,

and non-ex i s tences1 p . 329.

2 Brahina -s ft tra , 2 , 2 , 13 f . ; S loka -vdrtt ika , A numd na -p a rircheda ,

S I . 100 f . C f . P i'

libhzika ra S chool , p . 92.

[O

l

O[0 V A I S E S I K A PH ILOS OPHY

The t rea t i s e m ean s tha t commonn ess in substances i s

on e and comm onn ess in another ca t egory i s an other,wh i l e

K w h é i-ci m eans that commonn ess i s m an i fold,because

commonn ess in substan ces is d i fferen t from that in

a tt ri but es .

'P r . E h. says ( samanyah) dra vyad isu vrtt i

n iyamat pra tyaya-bhedac ca para S parata S ca-anya t vam,

pra tyek an’

n s va-as’

rayesu lak sana -av is’

esad v iSe sa-lak sanaabhavac ca-ek at vam

S ect i on 1 0.— N on -ex isten ce (pp . 1 1 8— 1 9)

1 . N on -escisten ces E terna l a n d N on -etern a l (pp . 1 1 8— 1 9)E terna l “ subsequen t non-ex ist ence ’

m eans the non

exist ence when th ings ha v e been des trov ed and wi l l n e v er

be produced,and eterna l reciproca l non-ex is ten ce is the

non-exi st en ce wh ich n e v er gi v es p la ce to mutua l assoc iation .

S uch subs equen t non -ex i stence ha s a beginn ing,bu t it has

no end . The subsequen t non-ex is ten ce whi ch m ay ha v e

an end is a k ind of an teceden t non -ex is tence ; but th is

i s cla ss ified in the t rea t i se under natura l n on-ex i sten ce .

R eciproca l non-ex i stence i s,i f i t i s succeeded by mutua l

a ssoc iat ion,a ls o to be cla ssified under natura l non

exi stence ; bu t rec iproca l n on-exi sten ce is et erna l and

d i ffers from abso lut e non-exi stence on ly ih -the poin t of

hav ing rela t i v i ty .

“Un i v ersa l i ty-pa rti cula ri ty

,l ike substance-n ess

,e tc .

,

ev iden t ly shows tha t the n in th ca tegory i s ca l l ed in the

origina l S ansk rt saman ya-vis

’

esa,because “

un i v ersa l i ty

part i cular i ty ” cannot be two cat egori es,otherwi se

substance-n ess is con ta in ed , in un i v ersa l ity exi stence ) ,and part i cu lari ty i s superfluous .

E xi st ence does n ot inhere in un i v ersa l i ty,etc .

1 p . 314 , Un iversa lit ies are d i fferen t from one another accord ing as

they res id e in subs t ances , e t c . , and becau se the not ions of t hem are

d i fferen t (wi t h regard t o each o f them ) (on t he ot her hand ) un iversa l ityis one in a ll it s substra t a (of t he same ca tegory ) , inasmuch as t here isno part icu larit y o f the m ark s and t here d oes not exist any part icularmark t herein . o

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

224 V A I S E S I K A PH IL OSOPHY

inferred from percept ibl e obj ects . A nd the eterna l nonex i stences are the obj ects of the second sort of in ference .

S ect ion 1 1 .— Con clu sion (p . 1 1 9)

P r . E h. states that th e common properti es of th e s i x

ca tegor i es are a stitva,abhidheya tva ,

an d j neya tva (p .

Knowabl e ” represen t s j neya tva , wh i l e a stitva and

a bhidheya tva are included in “ causes of thei r recogn i t i ons

The categor i es wh i ch on ly relate to the fi rst three

categori es are existence univ ersa l i ty ) , poten t ia l i ty ,

non-poten tia l i ty , commonn ess , and non-exi sten ce .

The category inherence i s in rela tion to th e other e ight,

except non-ex i stence , and part icu lar i ty on ly to substances .

The cat egor i es a ttr ibute and act ion are in rela t ion to

the other n in e,wh i l e th e category substan ce relates

to the t en , including substan ces .

S ubstance i s known'

to be the principa l , and the other

n ine ca tegor ies are th e m ean s to the explana t ion of

substances . Consequently , the n in e ca tegori es,howe v er

independen t and rea l,coul d hardly ha v e a m ean ing

,i f

t hey were con sidered apart from substances . The con

s equence may l ead to the conclus ion that the V a iSesik a

System in tends pr inc ipa l ly to expla in th ings and phenomena

in nature as they are . The whole sys tem w a s a k ind of

natura l ph i losophy in anc i en t Ind ia .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

D A S A P A D A R TH I ; TEXT , 11,1 0

,1

l B . adds

228 V A I S E S I K A PH ILOSOPHY

1 fl must be no tes on chap .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

V A I S E S I K A PH IL OSOPHY

D A S A P A D A R T H I ; TEXT , 1 1,3

,4

‘ B fi g fl fl § % fi

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

234 V A I S E S I K A PH IL OS OPHY

D A S A P A DA R TH I ,

‘ TEXT,11. 2 , 7

V A I S E S I K A PHILOSOPHY

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

V A I S E S I K A PH ILOSOPH Y

1 B . and I . H3.

TEXT,1 1 . 2

,2D A S A P A B A R T H I

é

fim

fi

fi

fi

fi

fi

fl

fi

mfi

mw

mm

ww

f

m

éo

RA

G

E

mammm

fi

mu

fi

qmfi

m

fi

fi

mm

m.

m

fi

am

mw

f

m

é

m

w

fi

fi

flo

mm

Winn

fi

fi

gfl

fl

fi

fi

fi

fi

flo

ww

fl

fimfi

mmfi

E

fi

x

fi

fi

fi

fio

kmu

eu

By;

An

fi

fi

no tesfig between

V A I S E S I K A PHILOSOPHY

m1 1

'

1 S ee note s on chap . ii, 2 , l .2 e . have in$ 3 9? I? 7%WI

S ee note s on chap . ii, 2 , 2 .

3 B . and I . ins te ad o f

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

24 2 V A I S E S I K A PH ILOSOPHY

D A S A P A DA RT H I ; TEXT , 11 . l , 1

in {m in

7k + fq £é fin ffil fi fi fifl % fiu

m a fi a -s e a a fi flt a e

fié

fifi d‘ g fl fi 315 9s 3 6

t§ + flg fig fl t fl fi fi fii fiP £

ER a s m fi l

ss'fieg é

fi flt fil‘

é fl i 113 5 F}? 75

e H an iflgg e s u

m ’ka m a

ge

fi ak

o

l‘

H 5 )!

75 135

w a s

fi te-3 611 5H fi fi

+ 119 7k %0

25 3

1111 4112

ffg fim m

gg+ €u

0

lla mK

iii

Ell

fig E

i\ E ;g

9 m 71151

it» Ell {2

Hit é: FE

1 m m fi g H e me s e s a meafi z m fi sfi e e fi s e fi x l lC fi g fi fi fifi fl fl fi fi ffmfi fi mm g afi

chap. ii, 1 , 5 . (I .= t l1e t ex t in the l ibrary o f the Ind ia O tficc , and

C . the tex ts o f the Commen taries Nos . 9 and

V A I S E S I K A PHI L OSOPHY

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

V A I S E S I K A PH ILOSOPHY

D A S A P A D A R T H I TEXT,1 . 5

V A I S E S I K A PH ILOSOPHY

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

V A I S E S I K A PHILOS OPHY

D A S A P A D A R TH I ; TE XT , 1 . 3 2 5 1

5 2 V A I S E S I K A PH ILOSOPHY

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

2 5 4 V A I S E S I K A PH ILOS OPHY

1 B . adds f .

2 B . om its

>Mhl~

év

€fr

a

11.s

asI"

_

e s:

s 1:

s a

(B . the text in the Bod le ian L ibrary. )

3 B . om it s i f S ee notes on chap . i,

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

25 8 V A I S E S I K A P HI LOSOPHY

A sa t-kd rya-urida , 35 , 4 1 , 49 , 5 5

-6,15 0.

A éraya (a ,

O

FH’

, Hf0,232 ,

24 1°vydp til va (55 g]? fig,

232,

A-

éray in (fi ,25 3, 143.

A sh -tva, 37, 224 .

A SUR I , 8-9.

A SVA-GH O SA , 6 , 40-5 , 65 , 8 1—2 .

A rma n (33, 25 4 , 4, 35 , 47, 74 ,

137 f .°karma n

, 187 f .A tom ,

-s , 24 f .,48

,5 1—2 , 5 7, 126 f .

196 f . -ea ter, 6 ; combina t ion ,

2 1,128 f. ( S ee A zzu , P a ramd zzu. )

A tomic theory , 31 of Jain ism , 24—5 ;

o f Buddhism , 26—7 o f V aiéesika ,

127 f . cri t ic ized, 130 f .A t tribute, 28—9 , 178 ; enumera ted ,94 ; d efined , 122 ; charac terist ic s ,1 13

,196 f. d iscussed , 49—5 0 , 60 f

-ness , 174 , 182 ; d efined , 10 1

charac terist ic s , 1 18 mean ing,183.

(S ee G'zma . )

A vaksepana ( j? x , 171—2.

A vaya ri-dravya (fi 5} g ,

193 .

A version ,

'

16 1 defined,97 c la s

'

sified ,

105 f . , 196 1. ( S ee D vesa . )

A vid yd (315 {El} ,204 f.

A -yoni

-j a ,132 .

A yuta-siddha -samba nd ha (Z; w

in} E , 176 .

Ba lm,196 ;

°lva ( 4: 52 2 5 21 14 5 1.

Bhakti, 14 5 .

BH KRA DV KJA ,14 .

BH AR TR-MITRA , 124 .

BH KTT A ,124 .

Bhd ua . S ee S a ttd .

BHAVA-DKS A ,124 .

Bhd vand , 75 , 163 f . , 199 ;°vi8e8a

(fl a 163.

BH XV A -VIVEKA , 67, 69 , 131 ,

188.

t’

w zi-ta la (mE ) , 2 18 .

m a (k , 78 , 195 ;°tva

, 149 .

BODAS,M . R . ,

12.

BUDDHA , 3—4 , 33, 40-4 , 5 5 , 82—3.

B udd hi (a , 25 3, 4 , 35 , 75 ,

1 5 2 f . "ap eksa ,

15 3, 173, 203 , 2 13 ;°

p 277'

va , 30, 15 4 .

BUDDHISM,1-2 , 5 0, 165 .

Ca ita sika,27.

Candra (fl 9 .

CANDRA-E KNT A , 1 5 , 137, 160 .

CANDRA-MAT I , 9 .

Ga il -f a. (sad -dha rma ) (E ii ) , 42 .

Ga it-Ii ( IE E ) , 84 .

Cari-Ian ( IE fi ) , 84 .

CARAKA , 39.

Ca'

rvd ka,20, 30.

Ca tegory , -ies , six , 3—4 , 7, 34 , 5 5 , 60 ,

69, 1 5 0, 167, 224 ; t en , 3—4 , 10, 66 ,

123 ; t w o or t hree ,28—9 ; various ,

123—5 ; mean ing , 12 1—2 : -ness ,37, 183.

Ca l ur-amdca ,130.

Cause, 134 ; inheren t , 102, 1 14 , 139,188 ; non-inheren t ,’ 1 13 f . , 14 122 15 f . ; effic ien t , 136 , 14 1 , 186

o f ac t ion , 163—4 , 2 12 defined , 98

o f rem in iscence, 163, 209 f .d efined , 98. ( S ee H et u,

C’

CE U (CH I -S H 5 ) (Q 198.

Cessa t ion ,168 , 212 ; defined , 98 .

CHEN-AN i ) , 3, n .

CHAN-T E-L o (Zélé FE fl ) , -MO -T I

E m.

CI -T S KN (K I CH I -z5 ) fi ) , 3-4 ,7, 4 1 , 4 5 , 74 .

Citta , 27.

Cognit ion , 1 5 2 f. defined , 97

c las s ified ,105 f . , 196 1.

Co lour, 14 5 ; defined , 94 ; class ified ,

105 f . , 196 f . ( S ee R cipa . )

Combus t ion ,200 . ( S ee P dka -j a. )

Commonness , 180 f . , 22 1-2 ; defined ,

100 . ( S ee S dmd nya . )

INDEX

Conj unc t ion,149—5 1 defined , 95

—6

c lass ified , 105 f . , 196 f. ( S ee

S amg/oga . )Contrac t ing , 39, 172 ; defined , 99c lassified , 1 14 , 2 14 .

Corn-p iece-ea ter, 5 .

D aéa -paddrtlzi (+ 5 ] i m,

quoted by K w hei-ci, 2—3 author,9—10 ; comment aries , 1 1 chara c teris t ics , 10—1 1 ; and otherwork s , 66 .

Demeri t , 169 ; defined , 98 ; c lass ified ,106 f. 196 f. ( S ee A dharma . )

Desire, 16 1 defined , 97 ; c lass ified ,105 f . , 196 f. (S ee I coba. )

DEVA , 3 , 42—3, 4 5 , 5 0-5 , 64—7, 67,74 , 81 , 86, 89.

D ha rma ( ii , 25 3, 10, 4 8 , 75 ,

164 f . ;°viée5 a , 167 ; in Ja inism ,

28 ; in M imamsa, 3 1 .

DHARMA-K I RT T I , 17—18.

DHARMA-PZI L A ,2, 9

-10, 18 , 28 , 48 ,

5 4 , 69, 7 1, 77—80, 129, 196 , 197,220—1 .

DH‘

A RMO T TARA ,17, 26—8.

D ia t om . S ee D vyanuka .

D IG-NEGA , 16—18, 67—8 , 71 , 84 , 15 5 ,1 5 9.

D n ha (g , 73, 145 f .

193 25 4 , 46 , 135 f .D is junc t ion,

1 5 0 ; defined , 96

c lass ified ,105 f .

,196 f .

Dram -t va ( ffi fig ,25 2 , 102 ,

192.

D ravya (E ,25 4 , 28—9, 122 ,

131 ;°

t va, 35 , 37, 67, 180 f . ;

kdrya°

127.

D uhkha (fi‘

,25 3 , 25 , 75 , 160.

D urga ti, 76 .

D uty o f four cas tes , 63.

D vesa ( flfi , 25 3 , 75 , 16 1 .

D vyanuka 1: fi , 232 ; 240,

e tc .

0

g)O

fi , 24 1 , 5 2 , 78,

129 f . , 146 .

E arth , 5 5 f. defined, 93 c lassified ,

102—3 and a t tributes , 103—4 ,

190 f . : -ness , 101 , 1 18 , 174 , 183.

( S ee

E ffort , 16 1 defined , 97 ; c las s ified ,

105 f . , 196 f .E ighteen schools , 8 , 80.

E ka -tva fig, 29,144-5 ;

sa rva°

, 14 5 ;°

artha ~ sama vdy in

i in 6 , 25 0, 15 6 f.E last ic ity , 163—4 , 172 .

E lemen t , -s , four, 20 ; five , 2 1

seven , 21 ; eigh t , 2 1 .

E mana t ion,143.

E manc ipa t ion , 73 f . , 170.

E mp irism ,30.

E terna l is t , 75 . (S ee S assa ta -vada ,

Sdsva ta -vdd in.

E ther,defined , 93 and a t tribut es ,

104 , 190 f . d iscussed , 49—5 1 ,

133 f . , 195 . ( S ec A kas'

a . )E xa l tat ion , 74 , 76 , 167.

E x is tence , defined , 99—100 ; charac teris t ics , 1 16 ; grea t , 36 ; d iscussed , 67 f . 219. ( S ee S a t , S a l ld . )

E xpansion , 39, 172 ; defined ,99 ;

c lass ified ,1 14 , 2 14 .

E x tens ion , Class ified , 105 f ., 196 f.

cogni t ion of , 72-3 expla ined,

145 -9.

E x t erminat ionalist , 75 .

FK-HSIANG-TSUNG ( 7; $91-2 , 198.

Fire, d efined , 93 c lassified ,

and,

a t tributes , 104 190 f . d is

cus sed , 5 7 f.3

Fluid ity , 162 ; defined , 98 ; c la ssified ,

105 f .,196 f . ( S ee D ram -tva . )

FRANKE , O . ,26 .

Gama na (fi fi 0 48 , 172—3 .

Ga ndha (fi , 25 3 , 143 f .

GAR E E,R . ,

143 , 149 .

“

i e nera lity , 36 , 180. S ee a lsoUn iversa l ity . ( S ee S cima nya . )

Going , 39 , 172 3 ; d e fined , 99 ;

class ified , 1 14 , 2 14 .

260 V A I S E S I K A PH ILOSOPHY

GOTAMA,89.

Grdhya (g; m, 25 3, 143.

Grav ity , 1 61—2 defined, 97—8

c lassified,106 f . , 196 f .

Guna (a t tribute ) ( fg, 25 3 , 28 ,

29, 6 1 , 122 ;O

tva (0

ii ,247,

67, 180 f . , 2 1 1 .

(updd hi) , 135 f .GURU (P RKBH KK A RA ), 124— 5 .

Gur u-tva, ( i fig or ii ,25 3

,

16 1 .

HAR I-V A RMAN ,4 —5 , 42.-3 , 4 5 , 5 0,

5 5 —6 , 60, (33—4 , 66—7, 80—1 , 89 .

B eta (a , 249, 81 , 1 5 6 f.H im ( 5511 15 ,

-168.

H siang-f d (sad -dha rma -pra tir12p a ka )

( 131 ii ) , 42 .

H WUI -JWE I (E -Y E I ) (g 55 5k) , 4°

H WUI -Y UEH (E -GE T S U) (g; H ,

9.

I coba (§k, 25 3 , 75 , 16 1 .

Impac t , 1 16 , 164 , 2 18 .

Im pe tus , 163, 208.

Impress ion , 98 , 162 f . c lassified ,

106 f . , l 9e’

f . (S ee Bhd vami,

S a 15 s ra .

Im puls ion , 98 , 1 10 , 2 18 .

Ind ividua l ity , 149 ; defined , 95 ;

c lassified , 105 f .,196 f .

I nd rz'

ya ( ifl ,20, 142 ; bud d lzz

39 ; ka rma°

, 39 ;°

p raJcrt i ( fl .

79 .

Inert ia,164 , 172 .

In ference , 86 , 1 5 5 f . defined, 97 ;

c lass ified ,105 f . , 204 . ( S ee A nu

md na . )

Inherence,

1 5 0 defined ,100 ;

charac teris t ics,1 17 ; d iscussed ,

79, 123 , 176 f . , 220 — 1 .

S ama cfiya . )

I -TSING fi ) , 17.

( S ee

JA CO BI , ,H 12—13, 18 , 31 , 39 , 6 5 ,

8 1 , 84 .

Ja in ism , 19, 23—5 , 28—9 , 32 , 34—5 ,

l a na ( 6? 231 16 1 , 208 .

J 'fid tr, 140.

i eya-tva (Hi 36 , 224 .

J o-t‘i-souei-mo , see Zho-thi-sw ei-mo.

Kala (as,25 3

, 46 , 134 f .'

dma -loka ,27.

K ANA-BHAR SA , OBH UJ , 5 , 89.

K ANADA , 6—8 , 18 , 4 1 , 7° 89,131 .

K ANISKA , 39, 43.

K APILA , 4 6 .

K arazza (E g , 2 15 .

K d ra zia (E ,

0

file, 25 3, 134 f .°

p ra tyaya 45k, 25 3 , 2 15 ;

8a -ap ek5'a"( 75 {if

0,

19 1

udbhfl ta°

,220.

Karman (fi , 25 4 , 29 , 5 0, 6 1 ,

122 ;°t-va (

C

E ,246

,67,

180 f .K a rtr , 168.

a virodhit va (0

ilifl fi , 234 ,

193.

KXT Y EY A Ni-PUTRA , 27, 44 .

K A UT I L Y A ,29

,34 , 80

—1 .

K riyd-hel u ( ff; W,

164 , 2 13 ;

°va t-tva (75 $51 {

15 , 190 .

K riyd-vdda , 19 , 25 , 188.

K sa zzika , 62, 170.

K UMA’

R A-J IVA , 3 , 36 , 40, 42- 5 , 5 0,148 .

K UMZRA -L ABD H A ,43 , 4 5 .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

262 “ 13 113 114 14 P H I L O S O P H Y

P dka -j a ,5 7, 62, 132 , 203.

P A K UDH A K A CCA Y ANA,19, 20-2 , 25 .

P afica a vaya va , 8 1 .

P AfiCA -sI KH A ,8—9.

P A fiCA -é lm fi, 7—8 .

P a ra ( f& 24 8, 135 ;°wa

(0

fig, 25 0, 1 5 1 .

P a ramd zcu (a tom ) (fi fi ’

24,26 , 78 , 127 , 146 f.

(ex tens ion ) (a a , 25 1 ,

148 ;°tva ,

148 .

43 , 74 , 77, 84 .

P a riksd,33.

P a rimdna (g , 25 3, 128,

14 5 f . tzl la°

,199.

P arimandala (E ,25 2,

5 2

P drima nda lya0

fi , 25 2 e tc .

P arindma , 143.

P RR'

S V A ,43-5 .

P art icu larity , 35 f . ; defined , 100

charac teris t ic s , 1 17 d iscussed ,

071. 175 , 2 19-20 . ( S ee V is’

esa J

P ara na

ogg g ,240 ; g g ,

16 1 ,

P ercept ion , 86 defined , 97 ; charac terist ics , 1 5 3

— 4 , 204 origina t ion ,

108-9. ( S ee P ra tya ksa . )

P ER I , N . ,4 5 .

P ilu-p dka-vd da , 62, 200.

P InGA L A ,

ONE TR A ,

4 5 —6 , 86 , 88—9.

P igha ra -p dka-vdda , 62 , 200.

P leasure, 1 60 ; defined , 97 c lass ified ,

105 f . , 196 f . ( S ee S ukka . )P os teriority , 15 1 defined , 96

( S eeA pa ra . )

P oten t ia l ity , 10, 123 ; d efined ,100 ;

charac terist ics , 1 17 ; d iscussed ,

178 f . , 22 1 . ( S ee S akti.

P RA BH K-KARA , 131—2 , 124—55 , 1 5 9 .

P ra krt i of S cimkhya ,49, 5 5 , 143, 14 5

zypra dhd na , 8 1 .

(ma teria l cause) , 5 8 , 79 °

tva,

SABARA-S V KM IN ,124-5 .

S'

abda (at tribute) (fi ,

121 , 176 .

(pramd zza ) , 86 , 1 5 2 f.

25 3, e t c .

P ramfi na,32 , 84—7 , 125 , 15 2 f .

P ramd lg'

,207.

P rameya ,86 .

P ramiti, 207.

P ra sd ra zza ( ffii fi ,248 , 172 .

P RA'

S A S T A -PADA , - 18 ,

7o_ l, 77, 125 .

P ra tij fid , 81 , 1 5 6 f.P ra t il i-vya ra hd ra -kdm rw (

"

a fi25 3, 134 .

P ra tya ksa. (Q ,

0

g , 25 0, e tc

£4“

ER, 86 , 15 2 f . °tva

,

192 ;°vi§aya (a ff}, 24 1 ;

0

go

,

nirvilca lpa ka°

, 68 , 1 5 3 ;

sa vika lp aka°

, 67, 1 5 3°(ibhd 8a

, 67.

P ratyaya. (fig , 227 ;0

g ,24 7 ;

0

g , 228 , ,e t c . 35 134 , 1 5 2 .

P ra vrtti ( 68 g ,168, 2 12 .

P rayama (a 5 ,25 3, 75 ,

P riority, 15 1 defined , 96 ; c lassified ,

105 f . , 196 f . ( S ee P am . )

P rz'

ya ( fl fi ,168.

P rthak-tva, (glj fig, 25 3, 29 ,

5 0, 128, 149 .

3 11 71515 ( 112, 25 4 , 32 ;°tva

(0

247, 35 , 182 .

P fiRA igA KASSAPA ,P uruga ,

140.

F lirt/“a na l,87—8 , 15 8.

RAJA-éE K H AR A ,6 .

Ra sa , 143 f .

111 14 .

ROHA-GUTTA , 6 5, 70 .

R ap e. (e , 25 3 , 143 f . ;°tva ,

182 ;°vfa t-tva (T;

0,

192 .

R z‘

tp a-loka , 27.

IND EX

S a d -da rs’

ana , 9 1 .

S cidharmya ,36—7

°5a idharmya ,167 .

S cid rs’

ya ,123—5 .

S AIVISM ,31 , 166 .

( 75 25 4 , 10 , 123-6 ,

178 ; 8a°

,179.

S KL I K A -NKT H A , 17.

S amdna -j d ti fig,233, 203 ;

°aneka ~ dha rma (313 [a] if ;

205 .

S dmfinya. ( la,25 4

,e t c . 35 —7, 123 ,

176 f . , 180 ; apa 7 a°

,37, 68 ; pa

O

ra°

,

37, 70 ; mahd"

, 35 —77, 70 ;°

1 isesa.

(657 Q , 229 , 111 25 4 , e t c . )

7 , 1(L 36°

vi363a°

, 35 , 37, 70.

S cimdnya to dr3ga , 87-8

,1 5 8 .

S ama vdya fifu a , 25 4 , 123,

S ama vd'

yi-kd razza ( fa a fit

25 3, 137 f . , 146 ;°

pra tyaya

25 3 , 139.

S ama veta (éE i i , 228 ; W 6 1

310,228 , 1 5 7 , 200.

S dmayika ,121 .

S amgluZta -viéem (E 2148 .

S a viikhyd . (gi ,25 3, e t c 124 ,

S AMKHY A , 2-3 , 8—9 , 34 , 40, 5 0 , 5 3—4 ,6 5 , 8 1 5 2 , 90 , 2 17 ; and Harivarman

,5 8 logic , 82 and Nagar

j una,46 , 48 4—9 ; and V aiéesika ,

3

S ci /Maya (15 m,204 1.

S amskdra (Ff , 25 3, 75 , 79 ,

162 f .S cuhva rta , 75 a ntara ° , tej a s

°

, 75-7.

S amyoga (fi ,25 3, 1 5 0 ;

°

j a

0

5 ,1 5 0 ; a l tara

°

,199 ;

°

vi3€ 3a ,2 19 .

S a n‘

wogin (6 am5 , 25 0,

15 6 f .

263

S mhyukta (H; 15 , 227, 149 ,

15 7 ;°8a 771yoga , 164 .

S u i-0 110 ( 19 42 .

S A SI JA Y A V E L AT T H T-PUTTA , 19,

22

84 19-m (sé -Y E I ) ( fa 9gik) ,42 , 4 5 .

84 51144 144 ,13 , 17, 89, 131 , 148, 190.

S A iliK ARA -SVAMIN , 3 , 68 , 71 .

S RN-L UN -TSUNG (E 577?4 ,

S aiztdna , 02.

S anto3a 168.

84 19-1110 (8 5 -115 , (5 4 , n .

S arva -ga ta (55 fi ,8 1 , 140,

148 .

S ARVKS T I -V KDA , 1 , 27, 43-4 , 49 , 15 0.

S a ssa ta -vd cla , 20, 23.

Sd §va ta ~1°dd im 75 .

S a t (75 , 35 , 37.

S a t-kam/a -vé da ,49

,149.

'

S a l td (45 Mg, 247, 7 , 36-7,

67°scimdnya , 35 , 37, 70 ; mahd

"

,

S ch ism ,29 , 34—5 .

S elf , defined ,94 , 139—40 ; and a t tri

butes , 105 , 190 1. d isc ussed ,4 8—9,

74—8 , 137 f . o f Nyaya , 5 3 , 86 f.ac t iv ity o f , 186—90. (S ee f lh nan . )

S e l f-consc iousness , 138 , 1 5 2 .

S ense-organ , 26—7, 39 , 5 8 f . , 78 ,

194 f . ( S ee I ndriya . )

S'

cga va c, 87—9 , 15 8 .

8 1174 -0 1111 (id) E ) , 4 5 .

S H E-L 6 (35S havl-cii (% 3 , 9.

S hortness , defined , 95 .

S IDDHA-SENA , 1 5 9.

8111740 11 1114 ,72 , 124 , 175 .

S ma l lness , 146 ; d efined ,95 . ( S ee

Amt . )S mel l , 145 ; defined , 94 c lass ified ,

105 f . , 196 f . (S e e

2641 V A I S E S I K A PHIL OSOPHY

S mrt i-hetu ( ff-e} 163.

S neha ( its, 25 3, 162.

S ound,170 ° d efined , 98

°

c lass ified ,

105 f . ; d iscussed , 6 1 , 73 , 197 f . ;

t hree mean ings,12 1 . (S ee S abda .

S pace, defined , 94 and a t tributes ,105 , 190 f . ; d iscussed , 47, 5 0,

135 1. ( S ee

S pa rga'

(35 , 25 3, 143 f . ;

°va t ~iva ( 75

0,

191 .

S pheric i ty, 95 , 148 , 192 f . ( S ee

P d rimamla lya .

SR1-CARANA , 13 .

SRi 4 1114 114 , 13,17, 123, 130—1 ,

147 8, 2 1 1 .

S tea l ing o f food , 63—4 .

S thiti-sthdpaka ,163 f . , 172.

S ubs tance, -s , 28 enumerated ,93 ; defined ,

122 ; c lass ified ,142

,

190 f . charac terist ics , 102, 190 f .-ness , 174 defined , 100-1

chara c terist ics , 1 18 mean ing ,37, 183 ; expla ined , 180 f. ( S ee

D ra vya . )S uya t i, 76 .

S ukha (313, 25 3, 25 , 75 , 160.

Sfinm -vzm ,3—4 , 6 5 , 84 , 86 , 124 .

S fiRY A SOMA,4 5 .

S ydd vd da (sap ta bha fcg i 71a ya ) , 83.

S yand a ,na (% fig,

249 , T if ,

62 , 2 1 7

S yllog ism . ( S ee Inference.)S yst em , six ,

1 1, 91 .

T AK A KUS U ,J 1 .

TKO -KN ( 135 -A N , 55 Q ) , 39, n .

T as te , ~ l 45 defined ,94 c lass ified ,

105 f . ,196 f . ( S ee Rasa . )

Ta ttva -j fid na —8 .

T a uta l zta ,90 .

T A Y UAN K UO (7k Q E ) , 46 , 11 .

Teachers , six , 19.

THIBAUT, G .,31 .

Throwing d ownwards , 39 , 171—2 ;

d efined , 99 ; c lass ified , 1 14 , 2 14

Throwing upwards , 39, 171 defined,

99 ; c lass ified ,1 14 f. 2 14 : -n ess , 174 .

T ime, defined , 93 and at tr1bu te ,

104—5 , 190 f d iscussed , 46 ; 5 1 ,

134 f. (S ee K ala . )

T iryak-pa va na ( ffiE 52, 2 17, n .

Touch , 14 5 ; d efined , 94 ; c lassified ,

105 f . , 196 f. ( S ee Spa rs’

a . )Tra irdfiika -ma la , 35 .

Trea t ise, T he . (S ee D as’

a -pa dd rthi . )Tress , c ircu lat ion in ,

1 16 , 2 17.

T ri-rap a -l iiiga ,15 9.

Trustworthy in struc t ion,86 .

T ryazw ka 2 fl 25 2,

5 2, 129 f . , 146 .

TSIN (fi ) dynas ty , 26 .

Ubhaya -ka rma -j a (a. fig, 25 1 ,

1 5 0.

Uccheda -rdda , 20- 1 , 23, 31 ;

Uddha razza 81 .

UDAY ANA , 90- 1 , 123 , 140.

Udbhata. (i ,237, c f . 220.

UDDY O T A -KARA,13—14 , 16

—18,89,

91 .

Ul t imate part iculars , 37, 67. 70 f . ,

103, 123 , 179 f . , 194 . ( S ee V iéega . )

Urn—

11m,3 -8, 4 1 ,

Un iversa l ity , 35 f . , 99 ; grea t , 36 ;highes t , 37, 70 f . , 174 ; lower, 37,68 , 70 f . , 174 ; d iscussed , 67 f .

,123

,

173—5 . ( S ee S cimd nya . )Un iversa l i ty part iculari ty , 7, 36 ,

69 f . , 79, 1 18 , 174 , 180, 222.

rpagl

‘uila, (g 113

3, 160.

Upamd na , 86 , 125 , 1 5 5 .

Upan aya , 81 .

Upa shrpa zza is“, 2 17, n .

UP A V A R sA ,124 .

Urdhva -j valana 1: 2 17, n .

L’tk3epa 77a (m 171 ;°t va

,

182.

Utsd l1a (%Utta ra ( 5 2 , 23 1 , 208, n .

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join