The Tattvasangraha [with commentary]

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

This page contains verse 2566-2567 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 2566-2567.

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

ज्ञानोत्पादनयोग्यश्च कांश्चित्प्रति भवत्ययम् ।
तस्मादुत्पद्यमानोऽयं न सर्वैरवगम्यते ॥ २५५६ ॥
अथवा यत्समीपस्थैर्नादैः स्यादस्य संस्कृतिः ।
तैरेव श्रूयते शब्दो न दूरस्थैस्तु किं पुनः ॥ २५६७ ॥

jñānotpādanayogyaśca kāṃścitprati bhavatyayam |
tasmādutpadyamāno'yaṃ na sarvairavagamyate || 2556 ||
athavā yatsamīpasthairnādaiḥ syādasya saṃskṛtiḥ |
taireva śrūyate śabdo na dūrasthaistu kiṃ punaḥ || 2567 ||

As a matter of fact, when the word-sound appears, it is capable of producing its cognition in some persons only; hence when it is produced, it is not cognised by all men.—Or, how could it be that the sound is heard only by those men in close proximity to whom it is embellished by articulations,—and not by those at a distance?—(2566-2567)

 

Kamalaśīla’s commentary (tattvasaṃgrahapañjikā):

It has been argued by the Mīmāṃsaka, in Text 2205, that “Just as the Word-Sound, though produced and appearing equally with regard to all men, etc. etc.”

The answer to this is as follows:—[see verses 2566-2567 above]

What has been urged does not affect the view that Word-Sounds are produced (not eternal). Because whenever a Word-Sound is produced by its cause, it is produced as capable of bringing about its cognition under certain limitations; and it is on account of this that it is not heard by all men at all times.

The view, however, that the Sound is (eternal and) is only manifested,—is open to the said objection,—even if the Embellishment is possible. This is what is shown by the sentence beginning with ‘or’.

The objection that ‘there should be hearing of far-off sound also’ is applicable, not only to the view that the Word-Sound is endowed, by its very nature, with the capacity to produce its cognition,—but it is also applicable to the view that there is Embellishment (of the Word-Sound). Hence this has been set forth as another alternative view—‘Why it is not heard by persons at a distance?’—‘is heard’ is to be construed here. What is meant is that it should certainly be heard.—(2566-2567)

The same idea is further clarified:—[see verse 2568 next]

Like what you read? Consider supporting this website: