The Tattvasangraha [with commentary]

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

This page contains verse 2436 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 2436.

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

विनिश्चितत्रिरूपं च साधनं यत्प्रकाशितम् ।
निषेधः शक्यते तस्य त्वत्पित्राऽपि न जातुचित् ॥ २४३६ ॥

viniścitatrirūpaṃ ca sādhanaṃ yatprakāśitam |
niṣedhaḥ śakyate tasya tvatpitrā'pi na jātucit || 2436 ||

The reason that has been adduced by us in its three-fold form,—cannot be refuted even by your father.—(2436)

 

Kamalaśīla’s commentary (tattvasaṃgrahapañjikā):

It has been argued by the Mīmāṃsaka, under Text 2106, that—“One who asserts the falsity of the Vedic Word, on the basis of Inference, has his Proposition annulled by the force of the cognition derived from the Veda”.

The Buddhist’s answer to this is as follows:—[see verse 2436 above]

The Reason that has been adduced’,—under the Chapter on ‘Inference’; where the three kinds of Reason have been described, as (1) based upon the nature of things, (2) based upon the relation of Cause and Effect, and (3) based on Non-apprehension.

Such a Reason cannot be refuted; because it is inseparable from the real state of things.—No one can alter the real nature of a thing; because that would mean the producing of another state of the thing; and when another state of the thing is brought about, it does not mean anything for the thing itself; as that would lead to incongruities. Consequently when a certain thing has been proved by proofs, it cannot be set aside by any one. Otherwise if there were setting aside of what is established by proof, the proof itself would become vitiated; this would mean that there would be no confidence in any thing; and hence that proof would not be reliable at all.—(2436)

The same idea is further explained in the following:—[see verse 2437-2438 next]

Like what you read? Consider supporting this website: