Verse 2534

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

अथाप्यतीन्द्रियो वायुः काणादैरिव वर्ण्यते ।
युष्माभिरपि तद्भव्य(द्भाष्ये?)स्पृष्ट्याप्तिस्तत्र किंकृता २५३४

athāpyatīndriyo vāyuḥ kāṇādairiva varṇyate |
yuṣmābhirapi tadbhavya(dbhāṣye?)spṛṣṭyāptistatra kiṃkṛtā || 2534 ||

If the air (reaching the ear) is beyond the senses (imperceptible), as asserted by the followers of Kaṇāda, and also by yourselves,—then, to what can its amenability to touch be due, which has been spoken of in the Bhāṣya?—(2534)

 

Kamalaśīla’s commentary (tattvasaṃgrahapañjikā):

The following text takes up the second alternative view (suggested in the commentary on Text 2531,—that the Air is not perceptible):—[see verse 2534 above]

‘Followers of Kaṇāda’—the Vaiśeṣikas; according to whom Air is indicated by (inferred from) Sound.

The author of your own Bhāṣya, Śabara has also declared that “when the aerial Conjunctions and Disjunctions of the imperceptible Air proceed from the Ear-drum, they are not perceived”. (Mī. Sū. 1. 1. 13.)

The objection to this view is set forth in the words—‘To what can its amenability to Touch be due?’—‘Spṛṣṭyāpti’ is the ‘āpti’—possibility of ‘spṛṣti’—touch. This is what the author of your Bhāṣya has spoken of; how is that? As against the view of the author of the Śikṣā, that ‘the Air becomes the Sound’, the author of the Bhāṣya (Śabara) has said—(under Sū, I. 1. 22) as follows—“If the Word-Sound were the product of Air, then it could only be Air in a particular shape; as a matter of fact, however, we do not recognise any particle of Air in the constitution of the Word-Sound, in the manner in which we recognise the particles of yarn in the constitution of the Cloth; therefore the Word-Sound cannot be a product of Air;—if the Word-Sound were the product of Air, then we could perceive it with our tactile organ (as we perceive Air); and yet we do not feel by touch any air-particles in the Word-Sound”.—(Translation, p. 41.)—(2534)