The Tattvasangraha [with commentary]

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

This page contains verse 2735-2736 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 2735-2736.

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

स्ववाक्यादिविरोधानामज्ञानाच्चोदना कृता ।
नित्यपक्षे तु सर्वे ते भवन्ति भवतां यतः ॥ २७३५ ॥
नित्या सती न वाग्युक्ताद्योतिकेत्युपपादितम् ।
आनुपूर्व्याद्ययोगेन नित्यं चानुपलम्भनात् ॥ २७३६ ॥

svavākyādivirodhānāmajñānāccodanā kṛtā |
nityapakṣe tu sarve te bhavanti bhavatāṃ yataḥ || 2735 ||
nityā satī na vāgyuktādyotiketyupapāditam |
ānupūrvyādyayogena nityaṃ cānupalambhanāt || 2736 ||

The objection in question has been urged by the other party, through ignorance that his doing so involves self-contradictions on his part; because there are all these (self-contradictions), if you hold to the view of the eternality (of letters and words).—It has been already explained that if words are eternal, they cannot be expressive; because they could not have any connection with the order of sequence (among the component letters) and so forth; also because they are not perceived at all times.—(2735-2736)


Kamalaśīla’s commentary (tattvasaṃgrahapañjikā):

The following Text points out that the argument put forward by the other party involves ‘self-contradiction’:—[see verses 2735-2736 above]

All these’—self-contradictions.

With the order of sequence’,—‘and so forth’ is meant to include the fact of their ‘hearing’ and ‘remembrance’ being successive. All this is so, because on account of the eternality (of words) the particular order of sequence cannot be due to time; and on account of their all-pervasiveness, it cannot be due to place; nor can it be due to manifestation; because the idea of such ‘manifestation’ has been already rejected.—Similarly, in the bringing about of cognitions, eternal words can serve no useful purpose; as has been explained on several occasions.—(2735-2736)

Like what you read? Consider supporting this website: