The Tattvasangraha [with commentary]

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

This page contains verse 1523-1525 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 1523-1525.

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

अतो यत्र परैर्बाह्ये त्रैरूप्यादि निराकृतम् ।
शब्दानामिष्यते तत्र नैवास्माभिः प्रमाणता ॥ १५२३ ॥
यत्र त्वेषामभीष्टेयं व्यक्तं तत्र त्रिरूपता ।
विवक्षायां तु साध्यायां त्रैलक्षण्यं प्रकाशितम् ॥ १५२४ ॥
एवं स्थितेऽनुमानत्वं शब्दे धूमादिवद्भवेत् ।
त्रैरूप्यसहितत्वेन तादृग्विषयसत्त्वतः ॥ १५२५ ॥

ato yatra parairbāhye trairūpyādi nirākṛtam |
śabdānāmiṣyate tatra naivāsmābhiḥ pramāṇatā || 1523 ||
yatra tveṣāmabhīṣṭeyaṃ vyaktaṃ tatra trirūpatā |
vivakṣāyāṃ tu sādhyāyāṃ trailakṣaṇyaṃ prakāśitam || 1524 ||
evaṃ sthite'numānatvaṃ śabde dhūmādivadbhavet |
trairūpyasahitatvena tādṛgviṣayasattvataḥ || 1525 ||

Thus then, in cases where the other party have denied the presence of the three features,—we do not regard the verbal statement to be a means of cognition.—In cases, however, where the presence of the three features is admitted by them, the fact of its being ‘three-featured’ is quite clear.—Where the ‘desire to speak’ is to be proved, it has been shown that the three features are present.—Such being the case, the word is as good a means of inference as the smoke,—because it is equipped with the three features, and because its objective is of that same kind.—(1523-1525)

 

Kamalaśīla’s commentary (tattvasaṃgrahapañjikā):

Thus then, in cases, etc. etc.’—This means that, when the other party puts forward the reason ‘because it is devoid of the Three Features’ as against the idea of Verbal Cognition being inferential, in the sense of being something external,—his argument is superfluous; (as we also do not admit that).

In cases however, etc. etc.’—This shows that the reason put forward by the other party is inadmissible, if it is urged against the inference of the Desire to Speak; because in regard to that, it has been shown, that all the three features are clearly present.—(1523-1525)

End of Chapter XIX (A).

Like what you read? Consider supporting this website: