Verse 684-685

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

वेगाख्यो भावनासंज्ञः स्थितस्थापकलक्षणः ।
संस्कारस्त्रिविधः प्रोक्तो नासौ संगच्छतेऽखिलः ॥ ६८४ ॥
क्षणिकत्वात्पदार्थानां न काचिद्विद्यते क्रिया ।
यत्प्रबन्धस्य हेतुः स्यात्संस्कारो वेगसंज्ञकः ॥ ६८५ ॥

vegākhyo bhāvanāsaṃjñaḥ sthitasthāpakalakṣaṇaḥ |
saṃskārastrividhaḥ prokto nāsau saṃgacchate'khilaḥ || 684 ||
kṣaṇikatvātpadārthānāṃ na kācidvidyate kriyā |
yatprabandhasya hetuḥ syātsaṃskāro vegasaṃjñakaḥ || 685 ||

Momentum has been described as being of three kinds—named ‘vega’, velocity,—‘bhāvanā’, impression,—and ‘sthitasthāpaka’, ‘elasticity’.—all this however is not compatible because things being momentary, there can be no action in them, of the continuity of which the momentum named ‘velocity’ could be the cause.—(684-685)

 

Kamalaśīla’s commentary (tattvasaṃgrahapañjikā):

There are three kinds of Momentum: Velocity, Impression and Elasticity.

Of these the Momentum named ‘Velocity’ subsists in the five corporeal substances, Earth, Water, Fire, Air and Mind,—and is produced by an action due to Effort and Propulsion. It is the cause of action proceeding in a particular direction; and prevents contact with tangible substances. For instance, in the Arrow, it is due to action produced by a particular effort; by virtue of which it falls on the head of a remote object. That is why it is accepted as having its existence indicated by particular effects. In suchngs as the branch of a tree, the same quality is due to the movement produced by the stroke of the stone hurled at it.

The Momentum called ‘Impression’ is a quality of the Soul; it has been said to be produced by Cognition, and also to be the Came of Cognition. It is accepted as having its existence indicated by such particular effects as Remembrance and Recognition.

As regards the quality of Elasticity, it belongs to corporeal substances; it is the quality that brings its solid and lasting substratum back to its previous position from which it had been torn away by some one’s effort; for instance, when the Palm-leaf which has been rolled up for a long time is spread out, and then let off,—it reverts to its former (rolled) position. The effect of this quality is seen in such things as the Bow, the Tree-branch, the Horn, the Teeth and also in Cloth and so forth, when they are bent and straightened.

‘All this’,—i.e. all the three kinds of Momentum.

Of the Momentum called ‘Velocity’, any such effect as connection with an action is not admitted; because it has been proved that all things are in perpetual flux (momentary); hence immediately upon things coming into existence, they cease to exist; so that no action is possible in them, of the continuity of which action, Velocity could be the cause.—If by ‘continuity of action’ is meant the production of things that is perceived to be separate from its constituent cause,—then even so, the Reason remains ‘Inconclusive’ (Fallible). Because what are inferred from the said ‘continuity of action’ are the previous Causal-Ideas of things produced in that way,—and not any such thing as the said ‘Momentum’; because concomitance with this latter has nowhere been perceived.—Further, if the not-falling of the arrow were due to the quality of Velocity, then it should never fall at all; as the Velocity preventive of such falling would be always there. Under the circumstances, what could be the explanation of the fact of the arrow falling while moving in a particular region of Ākāśa?—It cannot be said that—“the falling is due to the cessation of Velocity on account of its force having been destroyed by contact with such solid substances as Air and the like”;—as, in that case, the falling should come about before it does; as the Air obstructing it is there all along.—It might be argued that—“Before the Arrow actually falls, the force of the Velocity is very strong, it pierces through the obstacle due to the Air, and carries the Arrow further to another place”.—If that be so, to what is its subsequent weakness due whereby it does not carry the Arrow still further? As a matter of fact, in all cases, it is found that the Arrow falls in the way, while moving through Ākāśa, over the whole of which the contact of Air is equally present. It cannot be said that the Velocity becomes altered later on; as there is no cause which could produce this alteration in the Velocity; as its inherent cause in the shape of the Arrow is the same all through.—It cannot be right to say that what qualifies it subsequently is the cause called ‘Karma’ (‘Action’). Because that also would be open to the same objection. Even if the subsequent Velocity be different (from the initial one), as there would be no cause for the destruction of the former Velocity, it should continue as before and there should be no falling down of the Arrow.—The Contact of Air cannot be destructive of the previous Velocity; as if that were so, then the Arrow should fall down before it does,—as pointed out above; the Air being the same all through, its contact also would be there all through. So there is nothing in this explanation.—(684-685)