The Tattvasangraha [with commentary]

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

This page contains verse 1307 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 1307.

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

नाविकल्पं विकल्पे चेच्छक्तं(च शक्तं ?) विषयभेदतः ।
अकल्पत्वाच्च रूपादिज्ञानवच्चक्षुरादिवत् ॥ १३०७ ॥

nāvikalpaṃ vikalpe cecchaktaṃ(ca śaktaṃ ?) viṣayabhedataḥ |
akalpatvācca rūpādijñānavaccakṣurādivat || 1307 ||

“The non-conceptual cannot bring about the conceptual content,—(a) because their objects are different,—as in the case of the cognition of colour, etc.,—and also because it is non-conceptual—like the eye, etc.”—(1307)

 

Kamalaśīla’s commentary (tattvasaṃgrahapañjikā):

Bhāvivikta and others, who take exception to the idea that ‘the non-conceptual Perception leads to activity through bringing about the Conceptual Content’, bring forward certain arguments;—these are set forth in the following—[see verse 1307 above]

The cognition produced by the Senses (which is non-conceptual) cannot bring about the conceptual cognition, which is mental,—(a) because their objects are different, as in the case of the cognitions of Colour, Touch, etc.;—and also (b) because it is non-conceptual,—like the Eye and other organs.

In support of the Reason ‘Because their objects are different’, the instance cited is ‘as in the case of the cognitions of colour, etc.’; and in support of the Reason ‘Because it is non-conceptual’, the instance cited is ‘like the eye, etc.’—(1307)

The following Text points out the defects in the above reasoning:—[see verse 1308 next]

Like what you read? Consider supporting this website: