The Tattvasangraha [with commentary]

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

This page contains verse 2176-2180 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 2176-2180.

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

तस्माच्छ्रोत्रियदृष्ट्याऽपि कल्पनेयं निरीक्ष्यताम् ।
प्रयत्नाभिहतो वायुः कोष्ठ्यो यातीत्यसंशयंजातीत्यसंशयः (?) ॥ २१७६ ॥
स संयोगविभागौ च ताल्वादेरनुरुध्यते ।
वेगवत्त्वाच्च सोऽवश्यं यावद्वेगं प्रतिष्ठते ॥ २१७७ ॥
तस्यात्मावयवानां च स्तिमितेन च वायुना ।
संयोगा विप्रयोगाश्च जायन्ते गमनाद्धुवम् ॥ २१७८ ॥
कर्णव्योमनि संप्राप्तः शक्तिंशाक्तिं श्रोत्रे नियच्छति ।
तद्भावे शब्दबोधाच्च संस्कारोऽदृष्ट इष्यते ॥ २१७९ ॥
उत्पत्तिशक्तिवत्सोऽपीत्यधिकं नो न किञ्चन ।
तथैव तद्विशेषोपि विशेषग्रहणाद्भवेत् ॥ २१८० ॥

tasmācchrotriyadṛṣṭyā'pi kalpaneyaṃ nirīkṣyatām |
prayatnābhihato vāyuḥ koṣṭhyo yātītyasaṃśayaṃjātītyasaṃśayaḥ (?) || 2176 ||
sa saṃyogavibhāgau ca tālvāderanurudhyate |
vegavattvācca so'vaśyaṃ yāvadvegaṃ pratiṣṭhate || 2177 ||
tasyātmāvayavānāṃ ca stimitena ca vāyunā |
saṃyogā viprayogāśca jāyante gamanāddhuvam || 2178 ||
karṇavyomani saṃprāptaḥ śaktiṃśāktiṃ śrotre niyacchati |
tadbhāve śabdabodhācca saṃskāro'dṛṣṭa iṣyate || 2179 ||
utpattiśaktivatso'pītyadhikaṃ no na kiñcana |
tathaiva tadviśeṣopi viśeṣagrahaṇādbhavet || 2180 ||

Thus, from the point of view of the vedic scholar also, let us examine the matter: it is an undoubted fact that (in speaking) the air within the body, on the impact of the man’s effort, issues forth; and in thus issuing forth, it undergoes conjunction and disjunction with the palate and other spots in the mouth; and inasmuch as the air issues forth with some velocity, it goes along as long as the initial momentum lasts it is also certain that, in thus issuing forth, the component particles of the alr come into contact with, and become disjoined from, the still air (through which it passes);—having reached the ākāśa in the auditory organ, this air imparts a certain capacity to that organ and it is only when this is there that there is cognition (hearing) of the sound; from whence it is concluded that there is a certain ‘embellishment’ of the organ, and this is the only imperceptible factor (that is posited). This would be exactly like ‘the capacity to produce’ (which is postulated by the other party).—Similarly peculiar forms would be inferred from particular forms of the cognition.”—[Ślokavārtika—eternality of words, 121-126].—(2176-2180)

 

Kamalaśīla’s commentary (tattvasaṃgrahapañjikā):

Says the Opponent:—Even for the Mīmāṃsaka, according to whom the Sound apprehended by the Auditory Organ is one that is in contact with the organ, and is not-produced,—why should the said incongruity not arise?

In view of this question, the Mīmāṃsaka proceeds to draw a distinction (between the two cases):—[see verses 2176-2180 above]

The mention of the Mīmāṃsaka by the term ‘Śotriya’, ‘Vedic Scholar’, is meant to show that he is not a ‘Logician’, and in this way, by contrary suggestion, he indicates the superiority of his own view.

Question:—What is the view of these Vedic Scholars?

Answer:—‘It is an undoubted fact, etc. etc.’—The effort is the form of the operation of the Palate and other centres of speech;—on the impact of this effort, there is urged forward, the Air within the body,—which issuing out from the nave’, spreads itself out in the regions of the heart,—revolves in the throat and strikes the brain,—then proceeding through the mouth, it issues out.

All this is shown by the words—‘In thus issuing forth, etc. etc.’ When this Air issues out, it undergoes contact and disjunction with the Palate, etc.—When thus issuing out, it does not go on as far as Ākāśa extends; it goes along as long as the momentum lasts,—i.e it moves forward in accordance with the momentum imparted to it;—why?—because it issues forth with some velocity;—when the Air thus goes out, there come about Conjunctions and Disjunctions of the particles of that Air with the still Air—the calm, immobile Air. Thus when it reaches the Ear-cavity, it surely imparts a potency to the Auditory Organ. And when this is there,—i.e. when the Conjunctions and Disjunctions of the Air are there,—there is cognition of Sound; and it is on this ground that it is held that there is embellishment of the Auditory Organ. You yourself hold that there is production of Sound by other sounds or by articulation, and yet you also posit a potency or capacity; so also is the embellishment held by us.—As declared in the Bhāṣya (Śabara—on Sū. 1. 1. 13)—‘What happens is that the air-particles disturbed by the sound-provoking stroke, strike against the stagnant air-particles and produce Conjunctions and Disjunctions (i.e. ripples) on all sides, which go on spreading as long as the momentum lasts; the Conjunctions and Disjunctions (Ripples) are not perceived, because the Air (of which they are ripples) is imperceptible; and as for the Sound, it is heard only so long and so far as the ripples do not cease,—and after they have ceased, the Sound is not heard’,—(Translation, p. 35).

Objection:—If that is so, then there is no difference between the view that Sound is produced and the view that it is embellished.

Answer:—‘Similarly, etc. etc.’—‘Peculiar forms’,—i.e. peculiarities of embellishment are possible through the peculiarities in the cognition of the Sound. Hence the apprehension and non-apprehension by remote and proximate persons cannot be similar; as the embellishment would vary with each person.—(2176-2180)

Like what you read? Consider supporting this website: