Verse 716-720

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

गवादिशब्दप्रज्ञानविशेषा गोगजादिषु ।
समयाकृतिपिण्डादिव्यतिरिक्तार्थहेतवः ॥ ७१६ ॥
गवादिविषयत्वे हि सति तच्छब्दबुद्धितः ।
अन्यत्वात्तद्यथैष्वेव सवत्साङ्कुशधीध्वनी ॥ ७१७ ॥
शशशृङ्गादिविज्ञानैर्व्यभिचाराद्विशेषणम् ।
तत्स्वरूपाभिधानं च वैधर्म्येण निदर्शनम् ॥ ७१८ ॥
गवादिष्वनुवृत्तं च विज्ञानं पिण्डतोऽन्यतः ।
विशेषकत्वान्नीलादिविज्ञानमिव जायते ॥ ७१९ ॥
गोतश्चार्थान्तरं गोत्वं भिन्नधीविषयत्वतः ।
रूपस्पर्शादिवत्तस्येत्युक्तेश्चैत्र तुरङ्गवत् ॥ ७२० ॥

gavādiśabdaprajñānaviśeṣā gogajādiṣu |
samayākṛtipiṇḍādivyatiriktārthahetavaḥ || 716 ||
gavādiviṣayatve hi sati tacchabdabuddhitaḥ |
anyatvāttadyathaiṣveva savatsāṅkuśadhīdhvanī || 717 ||
śaśaśṛṅgādivijñānairvyabhicārādviśeṣaṇam |
tatsvarūpābhidhānaṃ ca vaidharmyeṇa nidarśanam || 718 ||
gavādiṣvanuvṛttaṃ ca vijñānaṃ piṇḍato'nyataḥ |
viśeṣakatvānnīlādivijñānamiva jāyate || 719 ||
gotaścārthāntaraṃ gotvaṃ bhinnadhīviṣayatvataḥ |
rūpasparśādivattasyetyukteścaitra turaṅgavat || 720 ||

(a) “In regard to the cow and the elephant, the peculiarities of name—‘cow’ and ‘elephant’,—and ideas—must be due to causes other than convention, shape, body, etc.,—because while appertaining to the cow and the elephant, they are different from the names and ideas of these latter;—just like the names and ideas ‘with calf’ and ‘with the goad’ (respectively) as applied to the same cow and elephant. The qualifying clause has been added for the purpose of excluding the ‘hare’s horns’ and such other non-entities. The name and idea of the other things are the corroborative instance per dissimilarity.

(b) “The idea pervading over all cows proceeds from something different from the body of the cow,—because it appears as a differentiator,—like the idea of the ‘blue’ and the like.

(c) “The ‘universal’ cow is something different from the ‘individual’ cow,—because it forms the object of a different idea;—like the idea of the colour and other qualities of the same cow,—also because it (the universal) is spoken of as belonging to that (the individual),—just as the horse is spoken of as belonging to caitra.”—(716-720)

 

Kamalaśīla’s commentary (tattvasaṃgrahapañjikā):

Bhāvivikta has argued, as follows:—“In regard to such things as the Cow, Horse, Buffalo, Boar, Elephant, etc., the peculiarities of Name—‘Cow’, etc.—and Idea must be due to a cause related to the form of each animal, but different from such causes as Convention, Shape, Body and the like;—this is the Pronouncement (of the Conclusion).—[The Reason is this]—Because while appertaining to the Cow, etc., they are Names and Ideas different from the Names and Ideas of the Body, etc.;—just like such peculiar Names and Ideas relating to the same animals as—‘the Cow with the calf’, ‘the Bullock with the load’, ‘the Boar with the dart’, ‘the Elephant with the goad’ and so forth.—The Corroborative Instances per dissimilarity are the Names and Ideas of the forms of the Body and other things.—It follows from this that this ‘other cause’ must be the ‘Universals’, ‘Cow’, ‘Elephant’ and so forth.”

The term ‘abhidhāna’ stands for Name;—‘prajñāna’ for Idea, Cognition;—the peculiarities in the shape of these two are meant by the compound ‘abhidhānaprajñānaviśeṣāḥ’.

‘Samaya’ is Convention;—‘Ākṛti’—Shape;—‘Piṇḍa’—Body;—the term ‘etc.’ includes Colour and such details. Different from these are the Causes related to and in keeping with the Form of each of the animals in regard to its Name and Idea.

Or the compound may mean that the Causes of the names and notions of ‘Being’ and the rest are different from Convention and the rest. The rest being understood as before.

‘Proclamation’—Proposition, Conclusion.

In order to avoid the ‘fallibility’ due to the Reason otherwise applying to non-entities like the Hare’s Horn (which also has a distinct Name and Idea relating to it),—the qualification has been added in the form ‘while appertaining to the Cow, etc.’.

The compound setting forth the Reason is to be expounded as—‘Because they have Names and Ideas different from the Names and Ideas relating to the Body, etc.’. The ‘Names and Ideas of the Body’ serve as the Corroborative Instance per dissimilarity; as in this instance, the presence of a cause other than the Names and Ideas of the Body is absent; and hence the Reason adduced is also absent in them.

Uddyotahara funder Nyāyavārtika on 2. 2. 61, page 319 et seq.] has stated the argument as follows:—“The Idea pervading over all Cows proceeds from a Cause other than the Body, etc.,—because it appears as a differentiator,—like the Idea of the Blue, etc.—Or again, the ‘Universal’ Cow is something different from the individual Cow,—because it is the object of a different Idea,—like Colour and Touch, etc.,—also because it is spoken of as belonging to this latter,—just as the Horse is spoken of as belonging to Caitra, and as something different from Caitra.”

All these arguments have been set forth in these Texts. They are easily intelligible.—(716-720)

The Author answers all these arguments in the following—[see verses 721-722 next]