Verse 1372-1379

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

चन्द्रत्वेनापदिष्टत्वान्नाचन्द्रः शशलाञ्छनः ।
इति द्विलक्षणो हेतुरयं चापर उच्यते ॥ १३७२ ॥
पतत्कीटकृतेयं मे वेदनेत्यवसीयते ।
पतत्कीटकसंस्पर्शप्रतिलब्धोदयत्वतः ॥ १३७३ ॥
चक्षू रूपग्रहे कार्ये सदाऽतिशयशक्तिमत् ।
तस्मिन्व्यापार्यमाणत्वाद्यदि वा तस्य दर्शनात् ॥ १३७४ ॥
कथञ्चिदसदात्मानो यदि वाऽत्मघटादयः ।
कथञ्चिन्नोपलभ्यत्वात्खरसम्बन्धिशृङ्गवत् ॥ १३७५ ॥
कथञ्चन सदात्मानः शशशृङ्गादयोऽपि च ।
कथञ्चिदुपलभ्यत्वाद्यथैवात्मघटादयः ॥ १३७६ ॥
त्वदीयो वापि तत्रास्ति वेश्मनीत्यवगम्यते ।
भावत्कपितृशब्दस्य श्रवणादिह सद्मनि ॥ १३७७ ॥
अन्यथाऽनुपपत्त्यैव शब्ददीपादिवस्तुषु ।
अपक्षधर्मभावेऽपि दृष्टा ज्ञापकताऽपि च ॥ १३७८ ॥
तेनैकलक्षणो हेतुः प्राधान्याद्गमकोऽस्तु नः ।
पक्षधर्मादिभिस्त्वन्यैः किं व्यर्थैः परिकल्पितैः ॥ १३७९ ॥

candratvenāpadiṣṭatvānnācandraḥ śaśalāñchanaḥ |
iti dvilakṣaṇo heturayaṃ cāpara ucyate || 1372 ||
patatkīṭakṛteyaṃ me vedanetyavasīyate |
patatkīṭakasaṃsparśapratilabdhodayatvataḥ || 1373 ||
cakṣū rūpagrahe kārye sadā'tiśayaśaktimat |
tasminvyāpāryamāṇatvādyadi vā tasya darśanāt || 1374 ||
kathañcidasadātmāno yadi vā'tmaghaṭādayaḥ |
kathañcinnopalabhyatvātkharasambandhiśṛṅgavat || 1375 ||
kathañcana sadātmānaḥ śaśaśṛṅgādayo'pi ca |
kathañcidupalabhyatvādyathaivātmaghaṭādayaḥ || 1376 ||
tvadīyo vāpi tatrāsti veśmanītyavagamyate |
bhāvatkapitṛśabdasya śravaṇādiha sadmani || 1377 ||
anyathā'nupapattyaiva śabdadīpādivastuṣu |
apakṣadharmabhāve'pi dṛṣṭā jñāpakatā'pi ca || 1378 ||
tenaikalakṣaṇo hetuḥ prādhānyādgamako'stu naḥ |
pakṣadharmādibhistvanyaiḥ kiṃ vyarthaiḥ parikalpitaiḥ || 1379 ||

“(1) ‘the śaśa-lāñcana (hare-marked) is not non-moon.—Because it is spoken of as the moon’;—here we have a ‘two-featured’ probans.—(2) Another is thus stated ‘i think that this pain of mine has been caused by the falling insect,—because its appearance was felt on the touch of the falling insect’,—(3) ‘in bringing about the effect in the shape of the perception of colour, the eye is endowed with a unique potency,—because it is used for that purpose,—or, because colour is found to be actually perceived by its means—(4) ‘the soul, the jar and other things are somehow essentially non-existent,—because they are somehow inapprehensible in any way, like the horns of the hare’.—(5) ‘Even the hare’s horn and such things are somehow existent,—because they are somehow apprehensible,—just like the soul, the jar and such things’.—(6) ‘It is understood that your father is in this house,—because your father’s voice is heard in the house’.—(7) In the case of words, lamps and such things,—it is found that they are actually indicative (of things) through the character of ‘being otherwise impossible’, even though they do not reside in the subject (minor term).—hence for us, it is the ‘one-featured’ probans that should be regarded as the indicative (probans),—on the ground of its being the most important; what is the use of assuming such characters as ‘residing in the subject’ and so forth?”—(1372-1379)

 

Kamalaśīla’s commentary (tattvasaṃgrahapañjikā):

In the following Texts, examples of the ‘two-featured’ Probans are cited:—[see verses 1372-1379 above]

The proposition may be stated either in the form ‘The Hare-marked is not Non-Moon’, or ‘The Hare-marked is the Moon’; and the Probans is ‘because it is spoken of by the well-known popular name Moon’, or ‘because it is spoken of as the Moon’;—the Corroborative Instance per dissimilarity being supplied by the clod of earth and such things.

(2) Another Probans is next mentioned, which is ‘two-featured’:—‘This pain of mine has been caused by the falling insect,—because its appearance was felt on the touch of the falling insect’;—i.e. the ‘udaya’, appearance, of which was ‘pratilabdha’, felt, on the ‘sparśa’, touch, of the falling insect.—The feminine affix ‘ṭāp’ is not added at the end of the compound, because it is intended to be a common factor.

(3) [Another example]—‘The Eye has the potency of the most effective instrument in bringing about the apprehension of the Colour existing at the present time,—because, while it is not damaged, it is that which is used as the Instrument, by a man who desires to see Colour and acts intelligently’—or—‘because it is actually found to bring about the cognition of Colour’; the Ear, etc. being the Corroborative Instance per dissimilarity.—‘Tasya’—of the Colour.

In all these three Reasons, there being no Corroborative Instances per Similarity, they have only two features.

(4) [Another example]—‘The Soul, the Jar and other things are somehow essentially non-existent,—because they are somehow not-apprehended,—like the Hare’s Horn—In this case, there is no Corroborative Instance per dissimilarity; as ‘the Jar and other things’ include the entire group of Positive Entities and they have been mentioned in the Proposition as essentially non-existent; and the negative entity has been put forward as the Instance; and apart from the ‘Positive’ and the ‘Negative’, there is no third category,—wherein it could be pointed out that the exclusion of the Probandum implies the exclusion of the Probans.

(5) [Another example]—‘Things like the Hare’s Horn are somehow essentially existent, as they are somehow apprehensible’;—the absence of the Instance per dissimilarity here also may be explained as above.

(6) [Another example]—‘This house is understood as having your father within,—because your Father’s voice is heard—Here a,Iso there is no Instance per Similarity; hence the Probans is only ‘two-featured’.

(7) In the case of Words, Lamps and such things, it is found that, even though they do not subsist in the Subject (Minor Term), yet they indicate (make known) things, in the same way as the Inferential Probans in the shape of Smoke, etc. Words and Lamps are not properties subsisting in the Jar and such things indicated by them; and yet the Thing is actually apprehended through them; hence in this case the two conditions are present—that of ‘absence where the Probandum is known to be absent’, and ‘being otherwise impossible’; hence the Probans here is a ‘two-featured’ one.—(1372-1379)

The following Text supplies the answer to the above arguments of Pātrasvāmin:—[see verse 1380 next]