The Tattvasangraha [with commentary]

by Ganganatha Jha | 1937 | 699,812 words | ISBN-10: 8120800583 | ISBN-13: 9788120800588

This page contains verse 512-514 of the 8th-century Tattvasangraha (English translation) by Shantarakshita, including the commentary (Panjika) by Kamalashila: dealing with Indian philosophy from a Buddhist and non-Buddhist perspective. The Tattvasangraha (Tattvasamgraha) consists of 3646 Sanskrit verses; this is verse 512-514.

Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation by Ganganath Jha:

तस्मादनष्टात्तद्धेतोः प्रथमक्षणभाविनः ।
कार्यमुत्पद्यते शक्ताद्द्वितीयक्षण एव तु ॥ ५१२ ॥
विनष्टात्तु भवेत्कार्यं तृतीयादिक्षणे यदि ।
विपाकहेतोः प्रध्वस्ताद्यथा कार्यं च वक्ष्यते ॥ ५१३ ॥
यौगपद्यप्रसङ्गोऽपि प्रथमे यदि तद्भवेत् ।
सहभूहेतुवत्तच्च न युक्त्या युज्यते पुनः ॥ ५१४ ॥

tasmādanaṣṭāttaddhetoḥ prathamakṣaṇabhāvinaḥ |
kāryamutpadyate śaktāddvitīyakṣaṇa eva tu || 512 ||
vinaṣṭāttu bhavetkāryaṃ tṛtīyādikṣaṇe yadi |
vipākahetoḥ pradhvastādyathā kāryaṃ ca vakṣyate || 513 ||
yaugapadyaprasaṅgo'pi prathame yadi tadbhavet |
sahabhūhetuvattacca na yuktyā yujyate punaḥ || 514 ||

Thus we conclude that it is at the second moment that the effect comes into existence out of an efficient cause which came into existence at the first moment and has not yet been destroyed.—If it had been held that the effect comes into existence at the third moment, then it would come out of the destroyed cause; as the cause of the development will have been destroyed, like the effect itself,—as is going to be explained later on.—There would be simultaneity only if the effect had come at the first moment. but this cannot be right,—being just like the doctrine of the effects coming into existence along with the cause.—(512-514)

 

Kamalaśīla’s commentary (tattvasaṃgrahapañjikā):

In the following Text the author sums up his position and shows that there is no flaw in the view that the Effect is produced from the Cause while the latter is still in existence:—[see verses 512-514 above]

As regards the alternative of the Effect coming out of the destroyed Cause, that is improper, as it is not held by us. As that alternative would mean that the Effect comes at the third and subsequent moments,—as has been held by the Vaibhāṣikas, in such assertions as—‘the one presents (the effect) when it is past’; if this view were held, then it would mean the admission of the view that the Effect comes from the destroyed Cause;—but such is not the view held by us; because it is devoid of reason.—

There might have been some chance of the anomaly of the Cause and Effect being simultaneous if the view were that the Effect comes at the first moment; as these same Vaibhāṣikas regard the Cause as ‘born along with the Effect This is entirely unreasonable.—(512-514)

Why this is unreasonable is shown in the following—[see verse 515 next]

Like what you read? Consider supporting this website: