by Ganganatha Jha | 1937 | 699,812 words | ISBN-10: 8120800583 | ISBN-13: 9788120800588
This page contains verse 1154-1156 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 1154-1156.
Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation by Ganganath Jha:
नञश्चापि नञा युक्तावपोहस्तादृशो भवेत् ।
तच्चतुष्टयसद्भावे यादृशः संप्रतीयते ॥ ११५४ ॥
नञा योगे नञो ह्यर्थो गम्यते कस्यचिद्विधिः ।
तृतीयेन नञा तस्य विरहः प्रतिपाद्यते ॥ ११५५ ॥
निषेधायापरस्तस्य तुरीयो यः प्रयुज्यते ।
तस्मिन्विवक्षिते तेन ज्ञाप्यतेऽन्यनिवर्त्तनम् ॥ ११५६ ॥
nañaścāpi nañā yuktāvapohastādṛśo bhavet |
taccatuṣṭayasadbhāve yādṛśaḥ saṃpratīyate || 1154 ||
nañā yoge naño hyartho gamyate kasyacidvidhiḥ |
tṛtīyena nañā tasya virahaḥ pratipādyate || 1155 ||
niṣedhāyāparastasya turīyo yaḥ prayujyate |
tasminvivakṣite tena jñāpyate'nyanivarttanam || 1156 ||
Of similar kind would be the Apoha, when a negative is joined with another negative; just as it is apprehended when there are four negatives. in some cases, when a negative is associated with another negative, what is apprehended from it is something positive; the third negative expresses the negation (absence) of that positive thing; and when for the negativing of that again a fourth negative is used, if that is meant to be spoken of, what is denoted by it is the ‘exclusion of another’.—(1154-1156)
Kamalaśīla’s commentary (tattvasaṃgrahapañjikā):
It has been argued (under Text, 977, by Kumārila) that—“In the case of a negative appearing with another negative, what sort of Apoha could be there?”
The answer to this is as follows;—[see verses 1154-1156 above]
‘Taccatuṣṭaya, etc.’—where there are four negatives.
Question:—“In what form is it apprehended?”
Answer:—‘When a negative, etc. etc,’,—The word ‘arthaḥ’ is to be taken as co-ordinated with the word ‘vidhiḥ’,
‘Negation of that’,—i.e. the negation of the said positive thing.
‘For the negativing of that’,—i.e. for the negativing of what has been expressed by the third negative (by itself), as apart from the positive factor.
‘Turīyaḥ’—is fourth;—the form being due to the rule which lays down the addition of the affix ‘yat’ in the sense of making up, to the term ‘catur’, and the elision of the first letter.
‘If that is meant to be spoken of’,—i.e. on the use of the fourth negative. ‘By it’—i.e. by the fourth negative.
‘The exclusion of another is denoted’;—i.e. it expresses the Reflection, in the positive form, as differentiated from the negation expressed by the third negative.—(1154-1156)