The Tattvasangraha [with commentary]

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

This page contains verse 2470-2471 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 2470-2471.

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

वस्तुतस्तु न सम्बन्धः शब्दस्यार्थेन विद्यते ।
भेदात्तस्मादनुत्पत्तेर्भ्रान्तैरारोपितस्ततः ॥ २४७० ॥
तथाहि विस्तरेणैषा प्रागेव प्रतिपादिता ।
शब्दार्थसंस्थितिः सर्वा विप्लुता व्याप्त्यसम्भवात् ॥ २४७१ ॥

vastutastu na sambandhaḥ śabdasyārthena vidyate |
bhedāttasmādanutpatterbhrāntairāropitastataḥ || 2470 ||
tathāhi vistareṇaiṣā prāgeva pratipāditā |
śabdārthasaṃsthitiḥ sarvā viplutā vyāptyasambhavāt || 2471 ||

In reality, there can be no relationship between the word and its meaning; (a) because there is difference between them,—and (b) because one is not born from the other. The relationship has only been imposed by people under an illusion.—That this is so has been explained in detail already. In fact, the whole position of the word and its meaning is highly complicated; as there is no invariable concomitance between them.—(2470-2471)

 

Kamalaśīla’s commentary (tattvasaṃgrahapañjikā):

Question:—“Why is it said that it is the common man that thinks so?”

Answer:—[see verses 2470-2471 above]

Because there is difference’;—this precludes the relationship of Identity;—‘became one is not born from the other’;—this precludes the relationship of Cause and Effect—Apart from these, there is no other relationship possible,—and without such a relationship, there can be no restriction regarding the Word expressing a definite meaning if there were, there would be incongruities.—For these reasons, the connection between the Word and its meaning must be regarded as imposed upon them; as has been explained before, in the section dealing with ‘Apoha’, the ‘Exclusion, of others’,—(2470-2471)

Like what you read? Consider supporting this website: